Re: MI query questions

[Nick Roberts <nickrob at snap dot net dot nz>]

 > > I suggest, for the moment, at least, that we make MI select "[1] all"
 > > automatically in this case.
 > 
 > Nick,
 > 
 > I don't think this solves the problem though. As Daniel pointed out,
 > 
 > -interpreter-exec console "b A::func"
 > 
 > will cause the same problem, and needs to be addressed. I haven't
 > thought this through well enough though.

Well, I guess it depends whether the existing behaviour breaks the front
end or not i.e when the prompt ">" appears will it know that GDB wants
more input or not?  If the answer is yes (I've not tried it) then things
can be left as they are.  If its no, then something should be done and the
solution being proposed doesn't sound like a quick fix.

"-interpreter-exec console "b A::func" could presumably be made to behave
as "-break-insert A::func".  Witness pending breakpoints:

(gdb)
-break-insert fgfg
&"Function \"fgfg\" not defined.\n"
^done
(gdb)
-interpreter-exec console "b ghgh"
&"Function \"ghgh\" not defined.\n"
~"Breakpoint 1 (ghgh) pending.\n"
^done
(gdb)
inf bre
&"inf bre\n"
~"Num Type           Disp Enb Address    What\n"
~"1   breakpoint     keep y   <PENDING>  ghgh\n"
^done
(gdb)

For the CLI command "break" the behaviour seems to be reversed but it's
no longer a query.

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob