Re: MI: reporting of multiple breakpoints

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:44:26 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
> 
> There are two events in hardware, yes - but "GDB will always see these
> two as separate events" is not accurate.  Suppose we've got an
> instruction at foo+0x10 that stores to a watched address and at
> foo+0x16 that has a breakpoint set on it.  The watchpoint will trigger,
> stopping GDB at foo+0x16.  At this point, we were stopped by the
> watchpoint, but we'll never hit the breakpoint - if the user "continue"s,
> GDB will politely step around the breakpoint.  In effect, we've
> hit the watchpoint and breakpoint simultaneously, and IMO it would
> be appropriate to let the user know about both of them.

Why do we step around the breakpoint?  As long as we do that, the
breakpoint never happened, and we don't need to announce it.  If we
_want_ to announce it, we should stop stepping around it, IMHO.