This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Hooks still needed for annotations
- From: Nick Roberts <nickrob at snap dot net dot nz>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- Cc: Bob Rossi <bob at brasko dot net>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 09:52:51 +1200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hooks still needed for annotations
- References: <17053.24737.153388.915345@farnswood.snap.net.nz><20050601113004.GC15414@white><17054.10607.109160.333076@farnswood.snap.net.nz><20050603190856.GB32722@nevyn.them.org><17056.56022.36723.292491@farnswood.snap.net.nz><20050603235923.GA9992@nevyn.them.org><17057.7583.990091.951816@farnswood.snap.net.nz><20050703170255.GD13811@nevyn.them.org>
> Having reread the discussion I would like to ask you what your goal is
> with this patch. You don't use this annotation, and you've said that
> it is very awkward to use because of the amount of output it produces.
> Why should we fix it (as opposed to garbage collecting it) if no one
> has missed it?
The original authors must have seen a need when they created these
annotations. I was just being conservative because there hasn't been a
release of Emacs to test my code fully.
> The comments in mention() suggest that at one time, GDB was trying to
> move away from breakpoints_changed to a more specific set of hooks.
> But now the hooks are more or less dead, and to get full mileage out of
> them they're going to need a redesign. So maybe we should just delete
> all three hooks, and replace the two that annotations use with
> calls to breakpoints_changed.
Yes that looks a lot simpler. If you are agreeable to me fixing it in the
first place, I will do that.
Nick