Re: Toward multicore GDB - Set theory

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> writes:

Pedro> That is [TRIGGER-SET] is a prefix, because it really is
Pedro> the same meaning as applying the prefix in other commands.
Pedro> That is, "the command applies to this set".  For breakpoints,
Pedro> it naturally means "the breakpoint applies/triggers to/on
Pedro> this set".  For "continue" it'd mean "continue this set",
Pedro> for print, it'd mean "print this expression in the context
Pedro> of this set", etc., etc..

There is a subtle difference, though, between break and other commands.
Because breakpoints re-set, the trigger set must be captured and
re-evaluated at re-set.

I think it is all ok though.  It is slightly weird but I think we can
explain it adequately to users.

Pedro> The "-stop" option is required when specifying a
Pedro> stop set (compared to not requiring "-stop" and just
Pedro> accepting the [] part, and LINESPEC is last.  This gets rid
Pedro> of LINESPEC ambiguity with obj-c at least, and leaves a saner
Pedro> path open for other future options too.  I've left the
Pedro> `--' option separator too for the same reason (like in your
Pedro> info macro & friends changes).

Sounds very good to me.


I think this is going to interact with my ambiguous breakpoint /
linespec changes.  At various points in the new code, linespec iterates
over program spaces; this should be filtered according to the trigger
set.  I am wondering whether you are basing your work on this patch set,
and if not, how we can best manage the changes.  I would rather not be
in a race to finish, but instead talk about how we can best cooperate.

Tom