Re: RFC: next/finish/etc -vs- exceptions

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:

Joel> We are all so busy these days...  When that happens, I suggest we
Joel> avoid being too conservative on the HEAD, especially this far
Joel> before the next branch creation.  If you've already had Pedro's
Joel> comments and you think you addressed them, how about going ahead?
Joel> We can always revert later on...

I will consider it.  If I do it will not be until next week at the
earliest.

Tom> +    case bp_exception_master:
Tom> +      /* These should never be enabled.  */
Tom> +      printf_filtered (_("Exception Master Breakpoint: gdb should not stop!\n"));
Tom> +      result = PRINT_NOTHING;
Tom> +      break;

Joel> I understand that an assert or internal-error would be unnecessarily
Joel> catastrophic for the user, but how about a warning instead? (just a
Joel> thought - this is really cosmetic)

I just copied what the other cases in that function do.
Maybe they should be changed -- I am not sure.
If so, that should be a separate patch.

Tom> +    /* Used for BPSTAT_WHAT_SET_LONGJMP_RESUME.  True if we are
Tom> +       handling a longjmp, false if we are handling an exception.  */
Tom> +    int is_longjmp;

Joel> This component is also used with BPSTAT_WHAT_CLEAR_LONGJMP_RESUME.

Thanks, I updated my branch.

Tom