This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH:MI] Use observers for breakpoints
> > I suggest you change the observer profile to take a breakpoint
> > rather than a breakpoint number, to avoid having going from
> > the breakpoint number back to the breakpoint itself should an
> > observer need it.
>
> My observer just uses a function called breakpoint_query (based on
> gdb_breakpoint_query) which only needs the breakpoint number. I
> think this is an internal detail which could easily be changed should
> the need arise.
I would still prefer it if you passed the breakpoint rather than
the breakpoint number. I'd rather not have to change the interface
later if the breakpoint ended up being needed.
> breakpoint_create_event
> breakpoint_modify_event
> breakpoint_delete_event
>
> I don't know if there's much to be gained in differentiating between
> creating and modifying a breakpoint but it would certainly make sense
> to have two observers, breakpoints_changed and breakpoints_deleted, say.
We can indeed start with 2 for now.
> > Just as an aside, I don't know how others would feel about that,
> > but I wouldn't mind seeing annotate.c:breakpoints_changed being
> > renamed to annotate_breakpoints_changed.
>
> This function was moved from breakpoint.c. A couple of years ago I
> submitted a patch to remove this and some other annotations, just
> keeping the level three annotations. If we are going to keep it, I
> suggest calling it annotate_breakpoints_invalid after the name of the
> associated annotation and to be consistent with
> annotate_frames_invalid.
Sounds good to me.
--
Joel