Re: [4/9] associate bpstat with location

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 15:24:48 +0400
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> > A minor stylistic point: could we please avoid the annoying
> > "Likewise"s?  The canonical way of writing a ChangeLog entry for
> > several functions with an identical change is this:
> > 
> > 	(bpstat_find_breakpoint, bpstat_find_step_resume_breakpoint)
> > 	(bpstat_num, print_it_typical): Look at bpstat's location's
> >  	owner, not at bpstat->breakpoint_at.
> > 
> > I'm quite sure the GNU coding standards describe this.  (Yes, I know
> > that our ChangeLog's abuse "Likewise" too much.)
> 
> I don't have an opinion here; I don't think this has any practical
> difference to future readers of ChangeLog.

It matters when you grep ChangeLog's for changes in a particular
function, for example.

> The reason why the assumption is valid is because the only way to have
> several bpstats refer to one breakpoint is when breakpoint has two
> locations, and both locations have the same address. That makes no sense --
> there's no per-location data that can make those locations different
> in behaviour, and so having two locations with same address would
> be a bug.

If this can happen only as a result of a bug, perhaps a gdb_assert is
in order.

> > >      case bp_access_watchpoint:
> > >        if (bs->old_val != NULL)     
> > >  	{
> > > -	  annotate_watchpoint (bs->breakpoint_at->number);
> > > +	  annotate_watchpoint (b->number);
> > 
> > Watchpoints also?  Did you make corresponding changes in the code that
> > sets watchpoints?
> 
> No. This patch is not supposed to have any change in behaviour whatsoever,
> it merely moves a data member.

Does that mean that the display of watchpoints for "info watch" will
be now different from "info break"?