From: Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@specifix.com>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Watchpoints with condition
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 17:24:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3zlwqfk5z.fsf@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1196744257.2501.268.camel@localhost.localdomain> (Michael Snyder's message of "Mon, 03 Dec 2007 20:57:37 -0800")
Michael Snyder <msnyder at specifix.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 06:23 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> > Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
>> > From: Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>
>> > Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 15:07:19 -0800
>> >
>> > In the use case you mention, why wouldn't 'watch v == X'; 'watch v ==
>> > Y'; etc. have worked for you? You would have gotten more hits than
>> > you'd like, but only twice as many --- is that right?
>>
>> It would have shown me hits I don't want to see, yes. And it is more
>> natural to write "watch X if X == 1" than what you suggest.
>
> I have to agree -- typing "watch X == 1" is intuitive to you and me
> (because we're gdb hackers), but it would not be intuitive to most
> users. Besides, as Eli says, it gives you unwanted hits. Why would
> we want to explain all of that (including the unwanted hits) to a
> naive user?
I guess I don't see why 'GDB stops your program whenever the value of
this expression changes' is hard to understand. Explaining
conditional watchpoints is a superset of explaining watchpoints, so I
don't see how it could be simpler.
*shrug*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-04 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-30 16:25 Vladimir Prus
2007-11-30 16:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-11-30 21:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-11-30 23:30 ` Jim Blandy
2007-11-30 23:49 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-12-03 17:54 ` Jim Blandy
2007-12-03 18:11 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-12-03 20:59 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-12-03 23:07 ` Jim Blandy
2007-12-04 4:23 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-12-04 5:11 ` Michael Snyder
2007-12-04 17:24 ` Jim Blandy [this message]
2007-12-04 17:30 ` Paul Koning
2007-12-04 21:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-12-04 23:17 ` Michael Snyder
2007-12-05 21:37 ` Jim Blandy
2007-12-01 1:10 ` Russell Shaw
2007-12-01 1:46 ` Michael Snyder
2007-12-01 9:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-12-04 2:04 ` Michael Snyder
2007-12-04 7:25 ` Vladimir Prus
2007-12-04 10:48 ` Michael Snyder
2007-12-04 14:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-12-04 21:08 ` Eli Zaretskii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3zlwqfk5z.fsf@codesourcery.com \
--to=jimb@codesourcery.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=msnyder@specifix.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox