MI query questions

[Nick Roberts]

 > >  > > I suggest, for the moment, at least, that we make MI select "[1] all"
 > >  > > automatically in this case.
 > >  > 
 > >  > Nick,
 > >  > 
 > >  > I don't think this solves the problem though. As Daniel pointed out,
 > >  > 
 > >  > -interpreter-exec console "b A::func"
 > >  > 
 > >  > will cause the same problem, and needs to be addressed. I haven't
 > >  > thought this through well enough though.
 > > 
 > > Well, I guess it depends whether the existing behaviour breaks the front
 > > end or not i.e when the prompt ">" appears will it know that GDB wants
 > > more input or not?  If the answer is yes (I've not tried it) then things
 > > can be left as they are.  If its no, then something should be done and the
 > > solution being proposed doesn't sound like a quick fix.
 > > 
 > > "-interpreter-exec console "b A::func" could presumably be made to behave
 > > as "-break-insert A::func".  Witness pending breakpoints:
 > 
 > I wouldn't like to change the behavior of the CLI commands. This would
 > be confusing to users and I don't think they would like it at all.

I don't know how it would work to keep existing CLI behaviour.  I think
"-interpreter-exec console" only works for single isolated CLI commands and
not for ones like "source", "commands", "if", "while" etc or user-defined
ones.  Current behaviour seems to be broken, I'm just trying to suggest an
immediate temporary fix.  Will your solution be ready for 6.5?

 > > (gdb)
 > > -break-insert fgfg
 > > &"Function \"fgfg\" not defined.\n"
 > > ^done
 > > (gdb)
 > > -interpreter-exec console "b ghgh"
 > > &"Function \"ghgh\" not defined.\n"
 > > ~"Breakpoint 1 (ghgh) pending.\n"
 > > ^done
 > > (gdb)
 > > inf bre
 > > &"inf bre\n"
 > > ~"Num Type           Disp Enb Address    What\n"
 > > ~"1   breakpoint     keep y   <PENDING>  ghgh\n"
 > > ^done
 > > (gdb)
 > > 
 > > For the CLI command "break" the behaviour seems to be reversed but it's
 > > no longer a query.
 > 
 > I think this is a bug in GDB that there is no longer a query. The user
 > is going to want to know why they are not prompted when using the FE,
 > but they are prompted when using GDB. I think this is a step backwards,
 > not forwards.

We've had this one before. With "b ghgh", deprecated_query_hook has the value 
mi_interp_query_hook which always returns 1, so this is deliberate.  With
"-break-insert fgfg" the error `Function "fgfg" not defined.' is caught further
up the stack and GDB never gets a chance to set the breakpoint.  I don't
know if that's deliberate.

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob