backtrace changes current source location
Andrew Cagney
cagney@gnu.org
Fri Oct 29 15:22:00 GMT 2004
Hmm, things have changed.
Felix Lee wrote:
> Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>:
>
>>(Don't forget to consider the error case - if an error is thrown a
>>restore would be lost)
>
>
> is it worth setting up an unwind handler for that? I couldn't
> think of a case where an error would be usual, and for unusual
> errors, all bets are off.
As a debugger, we're no longer going to gamble with the user interface -
even when there's an error the behavior should be well defined.
Can you find out why selected sal is being corrupted, code shouldn't be
modifying it.
>>Thanks for remembering this. However, as a separate test, it should be
>>in a separate file.
>
>
> how about putting the test in list.exp? or is the idea to move
> toward one test per file?
The latter, if foo.exp passes then feature foo works :-) If you're at a
loss for a name, just create a bug report and then call the test
gdb<prnumber>.{c,.exp} (we're no longer sharing C files between test
cases either :-).
Andrew
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list