From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12235 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2006 19:06:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 12226 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jan 2006 19:06:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:06:00 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B49948CC19; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:05:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 22200-01-2; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:05:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dhcp10.gnat.com [205.232.38.232]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B317748CC0C; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:05:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <43CA9D14.1010500@adacore.com> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:06:00 -0000 From: Robert Dewar User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andreas Schwab CC: David Anderson , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] multiple breakpoints from FILE:LINE References: <200601151736.k0FHapQB157574@quasar.engr.sgi.com> <43CA8C51.1040704@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00127.txt.bz2 Andreas Schwab wrote: > >What if you want to debug a particular function which inlines another >function that is also inlined in many other, frequently called functions? >In this case being able to set a breakpoint in a single instance of the >inline function can considerably reduce the complexity of debugging. Of >course, you can always fall back to setting the breakpoint on an address, >but that makes it difficult to reliably track the breakpoint position when >reloading the binary. > > Well you would not have this possibility if the function were not inlined, so I just don't see it as critical functionality. It's like wanting to breakpoint in one iteration of a loop to me ... and then you say, "gosh, we are unfolding this loop, so indeed we could do that and now have to work out a syntax to do it" >Andreas. > > >