Re: [RFC] multiple breakpoints from FILE:LINE

[Paul Hilfinger <hilfingr at EECS dot Berkeley dot EDU>]

Cyrille Comar writes:

> I believe it would be worthwhile to have 2 different break commands:
>      - break
>      - break-multiple (or whatever other more appropriate name)
> 
> break-multiple would have the semantics advocated by Daniel (break 
> automatically on all relevant locations)

But then 'break', being the shorter and more familiar command name,
would appear from a user's point of view to be the effective default.
If you put a breakpoint in the middle of an inline function (or an Ada
generic procedure or C++ template class method), it seems rather odd
for the default to be "break on one at random" [well, OK; that's what
it is in regular GDB now, but currently there is no alternative, so
there is no choice about defaults].  So if you went the distinct-
command route, you'd probably want 'break' and 'break-single' (er, or
something), the latter being a seldom-chosen specialized command that
would present a menu.  Another alternative is a new settable variable.

Paul Hilfinger