From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Matt Thomas <matt@3am-software.com>
Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: breakpoint commands and finish
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:19:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030417201909.GA2867@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20030417114351.04b179c0@3am-software.com>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 11:47:23AM -0700, Matt Thomas wrote:
> At 10:47 AM 4/17/2003, Michael Snyder wrote:
> >Matt Thomas wrote:
> >>
> >> What should be the behavour of the following?
> >>
> >> break function
> >> commands
> >> finish
> >> continue
> >> end
> >>
> >> Should finish cause gdb to stop and wait for a prompt
> >> or should gdb act on the continue? (gdb5.x does the
> >> former while gdb4.x did the latter)
> >
> >Consistant with your observations, the traditional behavior
> >has been that gdb would stop and prompt for a new command.
> >I believe that recently someone has changed it so that it
> >would at least try to execute the finish and the continue.
>
> Well, I just rebuilt gdb from the latest on sources.redhat.com
> and the behavior is unchanged.
>
> I was wondering (as an alternative) whether it would be possible
> to get a variant of the break command which would place a breakpoint
> at the return of a function (and print the return value like finish
> does).
>
> rbreak (or ebreak). I find I often was to place a breakpoint at the
> end of a function; it'd be nice if gdb could do that automaticly.
It's too darned hard :) Debug info does not represent the exit point
of the function. It's not always at the end; modern gcc's can emit
multiple exit edges, too.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-17 20:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-14 20:56 Matt Thomas
2003-04-14 21:00 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-04-14 21:04 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-04-14 21:11 ` Doug Evans
2003-04-14 21:33 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-04-14 22:27 ` Doug Evans
2003-04-14 21:23 ` Matt Thomas
2003-04-17 17:47 ` Michael Snyder
2003-04-17 18:48 ` Matt Thomas
2003-04-17 20:19 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2003-04-17 20:44 ` Doug Evans
2003-04-17 20:50 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-17 21:19 ` Doug Evans
2003-04-17 21:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-17 23:11 ` return value of a gdb command Smita
2003-04-17 23:13 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-18 12:10 ` Bob Rossi
2003-04-18 13:38 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-21 20:55 ` Andrew Cagney
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=20030417201909.GA2867@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=matt@3am-software.com \
--cc=msnyder@redhat.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).