public inbox for gdb-patches@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Schimpe, Christina" <christina.schimpe@intel.com>
To: Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com>,
	"gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
	Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] gdb, python: fix python breakpoint with extra spec
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 08:02:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CY4PR11MB20055924CDDE1B58DCC45378F951A@CY4PR11MB2005.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fd8ede18-2e12-5d83-da6c-697a10389ec5@redhat.com>

Hi, 

I just figured out that this was already posted in February 2021 by Mihails:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-February/176572.html

I added Tom to this conversation, as he reviewed this once:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-February/176575.html

This is Mihails' final comment:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-February/176578.html
He points to the same part of the docs:
".. create a new breakpoint according to spec, which is a string naming the location of a breakpoint, or an expression that defines a watchpoint. The string should describe a location in a format recognized by > the break command ...
Based on this wording I have understood that the intention was for any valid "break" spec string to also be valid "Breakpoint" spec argument. "
 
> So my original question remains: Why is a more python-y approach, utilizing
> Breakpoint.thread, not a better/more consistent solution?

Maybe both options are valid, as Mihails commented on this:
 "Personally I also think it doesn't harm to support both object-like API and this, considering how low of an effort it is."

Thanks,
Christina

Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de <http://www.intel.de>
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Sharon Heck, Tiffany Doon Silva  
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928

  reply	other threads:[~2023-06-09  8:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-02 10:59 [PATCH 0/1]Python " Christina Schimpe
2023-06-02 10:59 ` [PATCH 1/1] gdb, python: fix python " Christina Schimpe
2023-06-02 15:07   ` Keith Seitz
2023-06-05  7:36     ` Schimpe, Christina
2023-06-06 15:39       ` Keith Seitz
2023-06-09  8:02         ` Schimpe, Christina [this message]
2023-07-03  8:36           ` [PING][PATCH " Schimpe, Christina
2023-07-06 15:46             ` Tom Tromey

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CY4PR11MB20055924CDDE1B58DCC45378F951A@CY4PR11MB2005.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=christina.schimpe@intel.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=keiths@redhat.com \
    --cc=tom@tromey.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).