This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [0/2] more OO, Ada exception catchpoints: intro
- From: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Cc: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:14:27 +0100
- Subject: Re: [0/2] more OO, Ada exception catchpoints: intro
- References: <201106221420.08780.pedro@codesourcery.com> <m31uyl6aq1.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
On Wednesday 22 June 2011 18:24:06, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> writes:
>
> Pedro> (serving as proof/excuse for me to add a few more bits to
> Pedro> breakpoint_ops and export a few functions from breakpoint.c :-)
> Pedro> ).
>
> As far as I'm concerned, you don't need an excuse to do this.
> I think it would be best if all breakpoints had to use breakpoint_ops
> and there were no switches in breakpoint.c, just indirect calls.
Yeah!
Some things aren't easy to make fully breakpoint_ops'ed though.
Example, code that is switching on is_hardware_watchpoint/is_watchpoint
and compares breakpoints, or loops over "kinds" of breakpoints (watchpoints,
tracepoints/breakpoints). Maybe those would still stay.
I have a feeling that some of those operations that we do on
breakpoints currently should be done on locations alone (and we
should decouple breakpoints/bp_locations a bit more so that we don't need
to look at a location's owner.) Just a hunch though, haven't thought
about it that much through.
--
Pedro Alves