From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6745 invoked by alias); 18 Jan 2010 17:09:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 6736 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jan 2010 17:09:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:08:51 +0000 Received: (qmail 30904 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2010 17:08:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 18 Jan 2010 17:08:49 -0000 Message-ID: <4B54959A.1070403@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:09:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" CC: Stan Shebs , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] "actionpoints"? References: <4B5106CB.5060204@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00153.txt.bz2 Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Stan Shebs writes: > > >> A plus is that the term is sufficiently vague that it is sensible >> for watchpoints, catchpoints, tracepoints, breakpoints, and the rest >> of the menagerie, including future ideas we haven't thought of yet. >> [...] >> > > This does not sound like a plus to me. A good term is *clear*. > > Heh - "vague" is poor phrasing, I just meant that an all-encompassing term would ideally connote that wider compass, without carrying some other kind of more specific meaning. By that standard, "actionpoint" is not ideal, because we already use "action" to refer to what tracepoints when hit, and similarly for "eventpoint", because we do use "event" in GDB, though in only a couple restricted contexts. "*point" is perhaps technically most correct, although but as a non-word it presents difficulties, for instance when mentioning it over the phone. :-) Stan