Re: Temporary breakpoints

[William Gatliff <gatliff@haulpak.com>]

Kevin:


> Or should it remain in effect until it is
> hit in some fashion that's not due to single stepping?

I'd go with this one.

Here's why:  if I'm stepping in the vicinity of the breakpoint, it's usually
due to something unrelated to the reason the breakpoint was set, and so the
need for the breakpoint is still valid.

I can always delete the breakpoint if I decide I don't want it any more, but if
gdb silently deletes it and then I miss some kind of critical event, then I'm
annoyed.

Of course, gdb could just issue a message notifying the user that it's deleting
the breakpoint.  But, from the user's perspective, which is easier: re-entering
the breakpoint that gdb deleted, or deleting the breakpoint that gdb didn't?
For me, it's the latter...

BTW, I'm an embedded developer, and most of my work involves gdb in remote
debugging setups.  YMMV.


b.g.

--
William A. Gatliff
Senior Design Engineer
Komatsu Mining Systems