Re: RFA: documentation change for ambiguous linespec patch

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:16:22 -0700
> 
> To my surprise, the ambiguous linespec change mostly makes gdb accord
> better with the existing documentation.  So, I did not need many changes
> to the documentation.
> 
> Here is what I propose.

Thanks.

> +* GDB now handles ambiguous linespecs more consistently; the existing
> +  FILE:LINE support has been expanded to other types of linespecs.  A
> +  breakpoint will now have locations at all the matching points in all

How about "...will now be set on all matching locations..."?  "Have
locations" sounds a bit confusing; at least I never thought of a
breakpoint as _having_ a location.

> +                   locations will be added or subtracted according to
> +  inferior changes.

Will these additions and removals be announced by GDB?  If so, perhaps
an example or a note to that effect is in order.

Also, is "subtracted" the right word here?  I use it only as an
arithmetic operation, but I'm not a native speaker.

The rest is (trivially) fine with me.  Thanks.