From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-f42.google.com (mail-wr1-f42.google.com [209.85.221.42]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 080833857352 for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 14:33:36 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 080833857352 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=palves.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-wr1-f42.google.com with SMTP id u27so25175312wru.8 for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 07:33:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=KYquIlLqEi2/EBg2D2eOqhg3c4nrGEDK+DrezO5WOG0=; b=lqxqut4dMjzKlXouDHKBJHLbKL9DZ1aUhMn54dlKNaDt2XfgUsJLGia5mUtuNpMegb JrZKFXJ7+LaplQjWvpySt5Wrk2ItuVz2VQDCseh8csdJVWWgTTk1IVe0R/YQNLrtR1lv Y+9S4TX/QFrAXQxjp/hLraNt3HYyP6NWvQ4V5GJ42MKp3g/Y+4HySjHTTzauRkhM3ZPW 0yHqIFb3jXyPQQ+qzgISoZzj3mD/9OsVO2r9AJM96LbGzXujf5T0SHwmogCaQrTW/rb9 3WD4thEP55Sb1dOf+QawRnpVPlo0S7wPciaDlGn/qJ1l/okC/Ntu/LSffkhZDT5Ytbg8 3OrQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533UpCIgApXlqWo2fSSifAKg4J8YzJjTpJesCukQ5C3Y/e+++nJG 7UK7Q4Z/Y5Bh5DxhPS8MzsvQG2lvxC0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzSTTnZmLNfTFklkzZS0+co7a5F9IsL4tHCZkkpMVhLGg8yhm9O3L+wyw7wmTDWA02tn50fgA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6282:0:b0:20e:5d34:4e7e with SMTP id k2-20020a5d6282000000b0020e5d344e7emr23739034wru.137.1653402814993; Tue, 24 May 2022 07:33:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2001:8a0:f924:2600:209d:85e2:409e:8726? ([2001:8a0:f924:2600:209d:85e2:409e:8726]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q22-20020a1cf316000000b00394708a3d7dsm2209295wmq.15.2022.05.24.07.33.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 24 May 2022 07:33:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <0962c86e-a550-98c8-9683-ced7f29d911c@palves.net> Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 15:33:32 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] info breakpoints improvements Content-Language: en-US To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: luis.machado@arm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20220519215552.3254012-1-pedro@palves.net> <70ddb0b0-7c7d-3bcd-ef3d-246290ae1edf@arm.com> <1e932144-4f4d-4c10-bbaa-deef05684895@palves.net> <83fskz5aol.fsf@gnu.org> <0247c63e-189d-0a71-8b5f-257fd83ff6a3@palves.net> <83czg359mz.fsf@gnu.org> <45d7d87f-f78a-7c6b-28d7-285beecf9a8a@palves.net> <83bkvn58pe.fsf@gnu.org> <9cddada4-6572-7bb2-736e-3662097be07e@palves.net> <835ylv57om.fsf@gnu.org> From: Pedro Alves In-Reply-To: <835ylv57om.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 14:33:46 -0000 On 2022-05-24 15:25, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 15:09:30 +0100 >> Cc: luis.machado@arm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org >> From: Pedro Alves >> >>> I don't understand why would that be lost. I'm not proposing to >>> actually disable each location, I propose to _display_ them as >>> disabled in that case. >> >> If you do that, then you're hiding information for no good reason, IMO. > > From my POV, it's the other way around: we will be showing the user > the actual current behavior of that location. > >> It makes >> it confusing, one would no longer be able to tell which locations would be enabled >> once you re-enable the parent breakpoint. You'd make "enable 3.2" seem to have >> no effect on a disabled breakpoint, as "info break" would still show the location >> as disabled. > > Why is this an important use case? > It sounds much more useful and > frequent to first enable the whole breakpoint, and only then enable or > disable some of its particular locations. As long as the breakpoint > is disabled, the internal status of enabled/disabled of its location > is not important at all. It is important to be able to look at the breakpoint list and understand that some locations will be re-enabled once you enable the breakpoint, and which those are. We may want to present the enabled locations slightly differently when the parent breakpoint is disabled, but I disagree with showing them as disabled in the same way you would show them if the user had disabled them explicitly. I think we're going in circles now. > > This is a user-level command, not a "maint" command. So what is of > utmost importance is how this will actually behave, not what the > software's internal state is. A locations enable/disable state is not internal state, it is user-visible state that the user can control. I don't understand why you are bringing up such an odd "maint" command argument.