From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-37137-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 22492 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2010 13:19:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 22483 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Mar 2010 13:19:24 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il (HELO mtaout21.012.net.il) (80.179.55.169)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:19:20 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KZJ00L0060RZO00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:19:13 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.70.182.236]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KZJ00K126C04B50@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:19:13 +0200 (IST)
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:19:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Getting pissed off by gdb. Please help with stepping in.
In-reply-to: <201003191039.o2JAdKtj018316@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: rearnsha@arm.com, pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb@sourceware.org, dje@google.com, temp@sourceboost.com
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83k4t8ih3z.fsf@gnu.org>
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> <1268992264.6009.4.camel@e200601-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <201003191039.o2JAdKtj018316@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00170.txt.bz2

> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:39:20 +0100 (CET)
> From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> CC: eliz@gnu.org, pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb@sourceware.org, dje@google.com,
>         temp@sourceboost.com
> 
> Sorry, but I must be missing something.  Howe can you end up doing too
> many "step"s in the foo(bar()) scenario?  I mean, if you do one step
> too many, finding yourself stepping into foo() wheras you really
> wanted to step over foo(), you can simply use "finish".

In this simple example, maybe.  But in more complex situations (e.g.,
when arguments to `foo' include more function calls), not necessarily.