This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFA: revised implementation of permanent breakpoints
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 AT cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: RFA: revised implementation of permanent breakpoints
- From: Jim Blandy <jimb AT cygnus dot com>
- Date: 13 Sep 1999 23:54:43 -0500
- Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder AT cygnus dot com>, Jim Ingham <jingham AT cygnus dot com>, Stan Shebs <shebs AT cygnus dot com>, gdb-patches AT sourceware.cygnus dot com
- References: <199909131817.NAA03359@zwingli.cygnus.com><37DD8EFE.240E2ABC@cygnus.com>
> Could I suggest adjusting the opening line so that it doesn't mention
> the word ``step''? Perhaps something like ``Adjust the target state so
> that execution is resumed just after the permanent breakpoint
> instruction''. As you go on to explain, ``step'' in the traditional GDB
> speak has many other connotations.
Yes, good point.