Re: MI: changing breakpoint location

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 07:39:42PM +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> >> > Almost all of the work of the "break" command is figuring out where the
> >> > breakpoint should go.  I don't see an advantage in having more commands
> >> > that need to be able to work that out.
> >> 
> >> Can't that logic be factored out into a function?
> > 
> > Of course, it already is.  But that's not the point; I don't want a
> > proliferation of commands with similar functionality, when they aren't
> > needed.  The larger the MI interface grows, the harder it is to test
> > and maintain.
> 
> I think there's a tradeoff here -- in this specific case, all frontend
> authors will have to implement the same functionality, likely with bugs. If
> this is done right once in gdb, all frontends will work correctly.
> 
> Of course, frontend maintainers and gdb maintainers are different groups, so
> if you mean adding this to gdb will move work from frontend maintainers to
> gdb maintainers and you don't like that idea, I understand. Or you object
> to the idea even if it will backed up by a patch eventually?

It's not implementing it in GDB that's a problem.  As I said above,
it's maintaining it and testing it forevermore.  That's why I want to
keep the MI interface well defined and as small as possible (but no
smaller).

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery