This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] "actionpoints"?
- From: fche at redhat dot com (Frank Ch. Eigler)
- To: Stan Shebs <stan at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gdb at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 08:50:54 -0500
- Subject: Re: [RFC] "actionpoints"?
- References: <4B5106CB.5060204@codesourcery.com>
Stan Shebs <stan@codesourcery.com> writes:
> [...]
> Although we've been doing the overloading for a long time, it's really
> abusing our terminology, and has to be confusing to users.
Would a new *single* term for the variety of possibilities make the
situation less confusing?
> It turns out there is a generic term available - "actionpoint". [...]
In systemtap, we use the term "probe point" to identify a place (in
code) or a time (asynchronous event). What happens at those points --
tracing or modifying variables or whatnot -- is programmable, and
distinct from how the probe point was named.
> A plus is that the term is sufficiently vague that it is sensible
> for watchpoints, catchpoints, tracepoints, breakpoints, and the rest
> of the menagerie, including future ideas we haven't thought of yet.
> [...]
This does not sound like a plus to me. A good term is *clear*.
- FChE