From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6981 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2010 20:51:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 6970 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Mar 2010 20:51:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com) (65.115.85.69) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:51:48 +0000 Received: from mailhost2.vmware.com (mailhost2.vmware.com [10.16.67.167]) by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4031313058; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 13:51:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.124.100] (promd-2s-dhcp100.eng.vmware.com [10.20.124.100]) by mailhost2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 317938E6F1; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 13:51:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BA29262.1080509@vmware.com> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:51:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090609) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: Mark Kettenis , "eliz@gnu.org" , "pedro@codesourcery.com" , "gdb@sourceware.org" , "temp@sourceboost.com" Subject: Re: Getting pissed off by gdb. Please help with stepping in. 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> 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-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00153.txt.bz2 Doug Evans wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote: >>> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:38:18 +0200 >>> From: Eli Zaretskii >>> >>>> From: Pedro Alves >>>> 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! > > That argument is pretty weak too IMO. > This isn't a VS vs GDB discussion. Am I the only one who remembers that gdb used to have the behavior that is being discussed, and it was deliberately changed to behave the way it does today? My admittedly fallable memory cells are telling me that it was Fernando Nasser who championed the change, which means that it would have been at least five years ago. If I am right, the argument then was that the new behavior (what gdb has today) was closer to what users would expect.