This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8]


Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:10:46AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:05:02 -0400
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>

(gdb) info break
Num Type Disp Enb Address What
1 breakpoint keep y 0x08048354 in foo::foo (in-charge) at hello.c:8
0x08048364 in foo::foo (not-in-charge) at hello.c:8
(gdb)

Here's the problem that I see.


For foo::foo, there are two of these things.  Having them both in the
list would be nice.  Really nice.

For inline_accessor_fn there are 3.8 million.  In addition to needing
to do a whole lot of work on GDB internals before we could survive this
(memory usage; ptrace thrashing inserting and removing them; linked
lists of breakpoints; and that's just the beginning) this has some
severe user interface implications.  We don't want to print out all
those addresses by default!

I'm open to suggestions on how to deal with this.

How about a switch to "info break"? By default, show only the in-charge breakpoint, but if the user says "info break -all" or some such, show the other 3.8 million minus one.


From a user interface perspective, I got a really strong negative
pushback the last time I tried to add a switch to any GDB command.


OK, how about modeling after "info reg" vs. "info all-reg"? Giving us "info break" and a new "info all-break".



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]