Re: [RFC] Autoload-breakpoints new version [0/9]

[Stan Shebs <stanshebs at earthlink dot net>]

On 8/7/12 12:06 AM, Hui Zhu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the new version for autoload-breakpoints.

The first thing I'd like to suggest is to change the terminology. 
"Autoloading" is really a behavior of GDB, not a property of the 
breakpoints, which might be better said to be "predefined", or 
"target-defined", or "externally-supplied" or some such.  As we've 
discussed before, this is conceptually similar to GDB handling 
tracepoints when disconnected tracing is in effect; in that case,
I didn't call those tracepoints anything special, I called the process 
of acquiring them "uploading".

The analogy with tracepoints isn't perfect, because one of the 
assumptions is that other tools may be modifying these breakpoints 
behind our backs, perhaps via nothing more complicated than the big red 
reset button. :-) (And thus the need for asynchronous notification.)  So 
unlike tracepoints, we likely want to remember which ones originated 
from the target, rather than from GDB.

I think "target-defined breakpoint" (and watchpoint, etc) best captures 
the concept, and avoids any unwanted connotations.  Does anybody have a 
different term that they would like better?

Stan
stan@codesourcery.com