Re: [WIP] pending breakpoint support

[Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>]

J. Johnston wrote:
> Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:46:43 -0500, J. Johnston wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I have appended a patch to replace the previous hack.  I changed the
> > > code so it supports conditionals and doesn't fail if you specify
> > > source:line breakpoints. I also changed the mechanism to add a new flag
> > > to the breakpoint struct called "pending".  As you will notice, this
> > > adds a large number of checks because you can't just check for
> > > enable_state == bp_enabled without also checking for the pending 
> > > flag. I think that having two more enable states would have been 
> > > simpler, but
> > > I will let all of you decide.  With this change, you can enable/disable
> > > the pending breakpoint and see any conditionals attached to it. Commands
> > > should also work.
> >
> >
> > I've been using this patch since it was posted and it is very useful for
> > both Mozilla and libgcj debugging.  One minor UI nit: I don't think I
> > should be asked whether to make a breakpoint pending; I think the
> > "pending" message is enough (or maybe the behaviour could be
> > configurable).
>
> IMO, the query should be the default.  If there is no query, every time 
> you make a mistake, you would end up with an unwanted pending 
> breakpoint.  Anybody, feel free to jump in with your comments.

That's right.  That's why at NeXT we had to keep some distinction
between a pending breakpoint and an ordinary breakpoint.  Otherwise,
you mistype "break mian", and you never find out you've made a mistake
until it's too late.

> Regarding the annoyance of having to answer many queries, this could be 
> addressed in the future with a new setting, but that should be kept 
> separate from the initial base implementation.

Maybe a "-f" (for force) option.  "Break here, and I really mean it".