Re: [RFA]: Watchpoints per thread patch

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 04:32:23PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > Given our already overcommitted backlog: breakpoints on C++ 
> > constructors, breakpoints on inline code, DW_OP_piece, i18n, multi-arch 
> > solib, ....; how realistic is it that we'll, in addition, manage to both 
> > refactor the linux code base (I know this will be slow as I've been 
> > working on it) and also add multi-threaded watchpoints, all in the 6.4 
> > time frame?
> >
> > Let concentrate on clearing existing backlog, and not add another 
> > promise to the list.
>
>
> *sarcasm*
>
> You're right.  That's an excellent plan.  Let's just drop the
> multithreaded watchpoint patch, then, if it will never make it
> to the front of the backlog.

> *sarcasm off*

Looks like I touched a raw nerve, eh?

Well let me touch another one.  Ask any serious developer trying to use 
GDB and they'll tell you bluntly ``we sux'', and the things I listed 
(along with multi-threaded watchpoints) are why ``we sux''.

Can we sux a lttle less and at least support multi-threaded watchpoints?

--

The obvious solution here is to accept a simplified version of the 
patch, as that way we at least get the feature into 6.4.