From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31623 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2007 10:13:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 31613 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Nov 2007 10:13:26 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from heller.inter.net.il (HELO heller.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:13:22 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-1-43.inter.net.il [83.130.1.43]) by heller.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id EDO55657 (AUTH halo1); Fri, 16 Nov 2007 12:13:17 +0200 (IST) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:13:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Vladimir Prus CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Vladimir Prus on Thu, 15 Nov 2007 08:59:19 +0300) Subject: Re: delete_breakpoint: don't try to insert other breakpoints Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200711142324.11319.vladimir@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00331.txt.bz2 > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 08:59:19 +0300 > > > I think you are assuming that this code does and will always run > > synchronously. Is that a valid assumption? > > At the moment, I'm not aware of any way to invoke delete_breakpoint > while existing breakpoints are inserted. Is there one? > (In particular, "target async" does not seem to work at all). > > In future, this situation might be possible. However, in general > I think it's better to start by making code clear while still > working for current GDB, and then adjust it as needed for future GDB. > In this particular case, a call to insert_breakpoints, together > with some adjustments, would be much better for any future async code, > as it won't duplicate code logic. I'm okay with making the code cleaner, but on at a price of removing features, even if they are currently unused.