From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10164 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2010 07:57:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 10155 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2010 07:57:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_JMF_BL,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 07:57:25 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KWB00400WUSUQ00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 09:57:23 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.60.183]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KWB003DUY3MNX70@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 09:57:23 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 07:57:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [RFC] "actionpoints"? In-reply-to: <4B5106CB.5060204@codesourcery.com> To: Stan Shebs Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83iqb2cwhe.fsf@gnu.org> References: <4B5106CB.5060204@codesourcery.com> 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00146.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:22:35 -0800 > From: Stan Shebs > > It turns out there is a generic term available - "actionpoint". It > originally comes from TotalView I think, and was adopted into the HPD > (high performance debugger) spec back in the 90s. > > 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. A minus is > that it means having to teach an unfamiliar term to users, and it > entails a certain amount of hacking up the manual. Not only the manual, but also some commands, such as "info break". They will have to be renamed. I don't necessarily object, although personally it sounds a bit gross to me.