Re: Getting pissed off by gdb. Please help with stepping in.

[Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>]

On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 20:53 +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:38:18 +0200
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> > 
> > > From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> > > Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:55:39 +0000
> > > Cc: dje@google.com,
> > >  temp@sourceboost.com
> > > 
> > > Users often find this behaviour unexpected (I've often
> > > wished GDB would behave like what the OP is suggesting too).
> > 
> > Then why don't we change the behavior to match what users expect?
> 
> Because different users expect different things.  I for example would
> be somewhat annoyed by having to issue an extra "step".  And the
> argument that this is what people that are familliar with Visual
> Studio are used to is pretty weak.  GDB users are used the GDB behaviour!


They might be used to it, but that won't stop them hating it!  I'm in
agreement with those that want step at the end of a function to not
enter then next call.  It's a right royal pain having to have a sequence
such as 


        step
        <ret>
        <ret>
        <ret>

&*%^%^£$*&(*^ I've done one too many <ret>s, now I've got to restart my
debugging session and do it all again

        step
        <ret>
        <ret>
        finish
        step

R.