From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15531 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2010 09:51:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 15521 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Mar 2010 09:51:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (217.140.96.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:51:27 +0000 Received: from cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com (cam-owa1.emea.arm.com [10.1.255.62]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id o2J9p8eI025539; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:51:08 GMT Received: from [10.1.69.80] ([10.1.255.212]) by cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:51:08 +0000 Subject: Re: Getting pissed off by gdb. Please help with stepping in. From: Richard Earnshaw To: Mark Kettenis Cc: eliz@gnu.org, pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb@sourceware.org, dje@google.com, temp@sourceboost.com In-Reply-To: <201003181953.o2IJr9MV006009@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> References: <11611.203.63.255.139.1268879984.squirrel@webmail5.pair.com> <201003181521.48681.pedro@codesourcery.com> <8339zxv5tp.fsf@gnu.org> <201003181855.39643.pedro@codesourcery.com> <831vfhv2s5.fsf@gnu.org> <201003181953.o2IJr9MV006009@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:51:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1268992264.6009.4.camel@e200601-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00167.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 20:53 +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:38:18 +0200 > > From: Eli Zaretskii > >=20 > > > From: Pedro Alves > > > Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:55:39 +0000 > > > Cc: dje@google.com, > > > temp@sourceboost.com > > >=20 > > > Users often find this behaviour unexpected (I've often > > > wished GDB would behave like what the OP is suggesting too). > >=20 > > Then why don't we change the behavior to match what users expect? >=20 > 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=20 step &*%^%^=A3$*&(*^ I've done one too many s, now I've got to restart my debugging session and do it all again step finish step R.