Re: breakpoint commands and finish

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot 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