This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com 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: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint


On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:43:35PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:



>Well, throw/catch events will be (haven't done it yet) implemented
>using (some kind of) breakpoints.  Whether they will be in the table or
>not is a different question.  I personally think that the way
>catchpoints are handled at the moment is all wrong, since it relies on
>the to_wait method to determine what event occured; which is perfect
>for event reporting mechanisms and awful for events synthesized by
>breakpoints.


The software single step breakpoint, has a similar problem. One theory is to use the breakpoint table for them as well. The current interfaces definitly do not lend themselves to such a model.

Hmmmmmmmm.  I have some ideas how this would be done.  I'll stew on it
and bring it up after 5.3 branches.  It would involve doing great
violence to handle_inferior_event, unfortunately; but sometimes we've
got to take risks...
It can't be less violent than my patch to separate bpstop_stop_status() from the code that prints the stop status.

Andrew



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