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 writes:
 > On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 11:40:13AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
 > > >
 > > >Does anyone have any other comments on these eight submitted patches?
 > > 
 > > Ask michael.
 > 
 > That's what I was doing :)
 > 
 > > >So far, if I haven't lost any messages, the only disagreement is on
 > > >what to call impl_breakpoint:
 > > >  user / implementation (my implementation)
 > > >  user / machine (jim's suggestion)
 > > >  logical / physical (how debuggers work)
 > > >  virtual / actual (elena)
 > > >  abstract / actual (elena)
 > > >
 > > >I think user / machine is the clearest of these.  Others disagree with
 > > >me - no clear consensus.
 > > 
 > > Pretty clear objections to your suggestions though:
 > 
 > Eh, if you're going to count beans...
 > 
 > > 
 > > user/impl:
 > > + danielj
 > 
 > Some objections but I don't recall.  I'm still OK with this one because
 > implementation is the clearest way I can find to say what they are. 
 > They're the breakpoints used to implement.

I find it hard to connect "impl" to "implementation", my first though
is that it means "implicit". That's my objection to 'impl'.

 > 
 > > user/mach:
 > > + danielj, jimb
 > > - cagney
 > > - michael
 > > - joel?
 > 
 > That's +joel and +carlton.  I'm not sure whether Michael was
 > objecting, but rereading his message it seems plausible - Michael?
 > 
 > > logical/physical
 > > + cagney
 > > + joel?
 > 
 > Looks like -joel to me.  And -danielj was pretty clear, I think.  I
 > dislike this because logical/physical breakpoints says to me that one
 > of them is placed at a logical (virtual) address and the other at a
 > physical address.
 > 
 > > virtual/actual
 > > + elena?
 > > abstract/actual
 > > + elena?
 > 
 > Actual doesn't have the right ring to me, and neither does abstract,
 > but these are moving it the right direction.  I could just use
 > user/lowlevel or highlevel/lowlevel, to muddy the waters further.
 > 

I looked at a thesaurus, and while there seem to be tons of synonyms
for the 'high' level breakpoint concept, I found almost nothing to
convey the low level idea. "Instantiation"? I was trying to borrow terms
from the general language arena, where there are one-to-many relations
with polymorphism.

elena


 > -- 
 > Daniel Jacobowitz
 > MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


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