This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Inconsistency between cli and python breakpoints for ignore count tracking

On 13/11/13 08:10, Doug Evans wrote:
> Hi.
> Does anyone have a reasonable explanation for why we do ignore_count
> tracking for python breakpoints (even with a "stop" method) but not
> for breakpoints that have a cli condition that doesn't trigger?  The
> inconsistency doesn't feel right to me.

Me either, one branch is a bug.

I think we should discard ignore count tracking for Python breakpoints
that have a "stop" callback.

Because the "stop" callback is essentially "breakpoints with
conditions written in Python" I think we should never ignore the
return of that callback if the ignore count is not reached.

The goal of the "stop" callback is to allow much more complex
breakpoint conditions.  The user has pretty much free reign to do
whatever they wish, or interrogate any inferior value they can access.
(They should not affect the state of the inferior, as documented).
Because the API is documented (and written) for the "stop" callback to
be authoritative, I we should adjust the Python logic to mimic the
"normal" conditions code.



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]