From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29028 invoked by alias); 19 Jul 2004 03:58:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 28945 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2004 03:58:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO aragorn.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.23) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Jul 2004 03:58:42 -0000 Received: from zaretski (pns03-195-136.inter.net.il [80.230.195.136]) by aragorn.inter.net.il (MOS 3.4.6-GR) with ESMTP id DUZ43499; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 06:58:07 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:51:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Daniel Jacobowitz Message-Id: <7137-Mon19Jul2004065710+0300-eliz@gnu.org> CC: mec.gnu@mindspring.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com, rolandz@poczta.fm In-reply-to: <20040718214852.GA30558@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sun, 18 Jul 2004 17:48:53 -0400) Subject: Re: How to setup a breakpoint on constructor Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20040717205225.56BC04B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> <9003-Sun18Jul2004071107+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <20040718050420.GA13745@nevyn.them.org> <9003-Sun18Jul2004214239+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <20040718214852.GA30558@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00243.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 17:48:53 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > Is it one breakpoint with multiple addresses, or have we created multiple > breakpoints? The latter, I'd say. After all, that was one of the reasons for the change in the breakpoint machinery that now supports multiple locations for a single breakpoint, right? > If the latter, we have to somehow distinguish the two of them in the UI > so that the user can see which is which; and generate different > location strings for them, so that if the user recompiles and reloads > the breakpoints get set on the same place, in case they have different > conditions or commands or enable status. We should do these, true; but even if we didn't, the resulting deficiencies would be much less painful than the current situation. AFAIK, bugs in constructors and destructors are quite common, so having no good means to debug them is BAD, IMHO. > The general case of 'break ' has many similar issues, for > instance in templates or inlined functions; describing the location is > quite a problem. > > Not an insoluble one, surely, but I get stuck every time I work on > it... Maybe describing the issues here could produce some usefule discusion about possible design solutions.