public inbox for insight@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Thoughts on saving breakpoints
@ 2000-12-22 23:54 Tom Tromey
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Tom Tromey @ 2000-12-22 23:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Insight List

Last week I did some debugging and I had an experience which helped me
understand why I think breakpoints should be saved the way I think
they should be saved.

I was debugging gcc, and (thought I :-) found my bug.  I fixed it and
rebuilt gcc without stopping insight.  When I re-ran the inferior, gdb
re-read the gcc executable, recomputed (I presume) and reinserted my
breakpoints, and then actually restarted the debuggee.

My feeling is that saving the Insight session and restarting it should
have roughly the same user-visible effect as recompiling the
inferior's executable.

We all know there's no perfect way to save and restore breakpoints due
to possible changes in the inferior.  However, I think that if we
adopt the same strategy that gdb itself uses when re-reading the
executable, then this will be the least suprising to the user.  I for
one would find it confusing if gdb and Insight adopted different
heuristics here.

Tom

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2000-12-22 23:54 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-12-22 23:54 Thoughts on saving breakpoints Tom Tromey

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).