RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8]
Daniel Jacobowitz
drow@mvista.com
Mon Nov 3 18:00:00 GMT 2003
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 12:49:23AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 06:34:20PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 11:55:17 -0400
> > > From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> > >
> > > I get the feeling that the naming discussion has converged to:
> > >
> > > "breakpoint" and "location"
> >
> > Did it? I (perhaps among others) suggested that, but I'm not sure
> > people agreed to it.
> >
> > > Unlike the "user" vs "machine" I don't see us having much difficulty
> > > explaining "breakpoint" and "location" to either users or developers. Ya!
> >
> > Obviously, I agree ;-)
>
> Well, I haven't seen anyone disagree.
>
> This was a wonderfully informative, if somewhat disordered, discussion.
> I have a lot of messages flagged that I would still like to respond to,
> and I think I'll try to summarize the issues and alternatives discussed
> and mail them to gdb@, where this conversation should really happen.
> It'll be a little while; I haven't had much time for GDB lately.
>
> Does anyone disagree with the "breakpoint" and "location" convention
> for now? Michael, with the change from impl_breakpoint to bp_location,
> are the patches I posted OK? Just let me know if you'd like me to
> update and repost them first.
>
> I'd like to:
> - get those cleanups cleaned up and in
> - create a branch for more exploratory work; I think that to design
> anything much beyond here I'm simply going to need more
> implementation experience to talk from.
> - then raise more conversation when I have a base to work on.
Ping.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list