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

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 09:03:27AM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:41:34 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> said:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 01:45:18PM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> 
> >> From that perspective, I think a breakpoint is a breakpoint.  To
> >> the user it represents a location in the *source* code.  The fact
> >> that this may translate to several locations in the machine code is
> >> "under the hood", so to speak.
> ...
> >> So for instance, we might say that *this* is the breakpoint, and if
> >> you want to know, *these* are the breakpoint's *locations*.
> 
> > Quite happy :)  This suggests struct breakpoint and struct bp_location
> > (or maybe even bp_element, which is clearer for watchpoints, but less
> > clear overall).
> 
> But they're both locations - one kind of location is in the source
> code, and one is in the machine code.  So I would like to have the
> word 'source' in the user breakpoint structure.

But a user breakpoint doesn't have to be a source location - or even
have one.

(gdb) break *0x50003000

(gdb) break function_with_no_debug_info

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer