From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25526 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2004 19:38:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25519 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2004 19:38:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.142) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 14 Sep 2004 19:38:26 -0000 Received: by us.ibm.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BB65FB188; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:35:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Paul Gilliam Reply-To: pgilliam@us.ibm.com To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: breakpoints in C++ constructors Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 19:38:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200409141235.42478.pgilliam@us.ibm.com> X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00107.txt.bz2 On Tuesday 14 September 2004 09:06, Jim Blandy wrote: -- snip -- > Daniel has done some work on the breakpoint code to -- snip -- > The original intention was to extend this to allow a single user > > breakpoint to cover multiple machine-code locations, but that change > hasn't been made yet: the code still assumes a one-to-one > relationship. Completing this would be the natural way to support > constructor breakpoints. If one breakpoint could cover multiple machine-code locations, then that mechanizm could be use for the requested new "break at all functions" command. -=# Paul Gilliam #=-