Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8]

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>]

> This will make it simpler to have, for instance, a breakpoint on both the
> in-charge and not-in-charge constructors without bothering the user with
> that detail.  Similarly (eventually!) for copies of an inlined function, or
> multiple copies of an executed line.  This is a bit of a ways in the future
> but I'm working on it.

I get the feeling that the naming discussion has converged to:

	"breakpoint" and "location"

where a breakpoint has 1:N locations, and multiple breakpoints can share 
common locations.

Unlike the "user" vs "machine" I don't see us having much difficulty 
explaining "breakpoint" and "location" to either users or developers.  Ya!

enjoy,
Andrew