Re: [RFA] Fix regression in "commands"

[Tom Tromey <tom at tromey dot com>]

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

Pedro> Hmm, for the truly "no breakpoints specified" case, 
Pedro> it seems to me that before we can reach this error, we've already
Pedro> hit the error at the top of map_breakpoint_numbers:
Pedro>   if (args == 0 || *args == '\0')
Pedro>     error_no_arg (_("one or more breakpoint numbers"));
Pedro> and for the case where the user specifies some argument
Pedro> that doesn't match any breakpoint, map_breakpoint_numbers
Pedro> already printed one of:
Pedro>     warning (_("bad breakpoint number at or near '%s'"), p);
Pedro>     printf_unfiltered (_("No breakpoint number %d.\n"), num);
Pedro> when the "No breakpoints specified." error is reached.

I think the problem is that if the error call is removed from
commands_command_1, then a failure here won't throw at all, because
map_breakpoint_number_range just prints a message (either with warning
or printf_unfiltered -- not sure why the discrepancy), and doesn't
throw.

But, this would mean that an script erroneously using "commands" would
not be interrupted, which seems like maybe a bad result.  Though, as you
point out, "delete" doesn't do this, so maybe it is ok?

Making map_breakpoint_number_range throw would mean that the case where
you have breakpoint 2 and do "commands 1-3" would now fail -- although
that's worked with a warning since ranges were added.

Tom