Re: Fix for PR 1971 .

[Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot radhakrishnan at codito dot com>]

On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 23:57 -0800, Jim Blandy wrote:
> On 1/3/06, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@codito.com> wrote:
> > I am not sure about removing the get_prev_frame. We need it for the
> > correct frame id .  In case you were stepping over a recursive call and
> > deep inside after main had executed  you would need the correct frame id
> > of the return frame and in the other case a null_frame_id.
> 
> Okay, I see.
> 
> Hmm.  If I'm reading breakpoint.c right, null_frame_id acts as a
> wildcard, saying, treat the breakpoint as applying to any frame.  So
> we're assuming that, whoever the caller of the "oldest" frame is, it's
> not going to be called recursively (or else the step-resume breakpoint
> would trigger in one of the inner frames).  I don't know if that case
> is worth worrying about.


Thanks for all the review and the comments. Yes, that sounds right, I
can't think of a situation where we should worry about this.  Will wait
a couple of days and if there are no objections I will go ahead and
commit it. 

cheers
Ramana



> 
> It looks okay to me, then.  Let's let it sit for a few days; if nobody
> has futher comments, go ahead and commit.
>