[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [ptp-dev] Multiple job with breakpoint
|
Please log as an enhancement for the next release.
Greg
On Sep 13, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Donny Kurniawan wrote:
Greg,
Currently, we do not have support for breakpoints enabled/disabled
flag. The flag is used by CDT for "Run To Line" functionality.
Now, because we associate a breakpoint with a set of processes, if
we want to mimic "Run To Line" functionality, we need to maintain a
data structure (i.e. boolean times (num of procs)) in the breakpoint.
We do not have that kind of thing i.e. "Run To Line" in PTP currently.
Donny
On 9/14/05, Greg Watson <gwatson@xxxxxxxx> wrote: Clement,
What you have implemented sounds reasonable, though I think this is
something that needs to be raised with the core debug people. In
addition to the enabled/disabled state, there needs to be a visible/
not-visible state for breakpoints. This is something I can discuss at
the CDT Fall Conference.
Greg
On Sep 12, 2005, at 9:40 PM, Clement Chu wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> I remembered you mentioned that you want to remove all
> breakpoint markers if the job is changed. For example, job0
> contains 3 breakpoints. If the job is changed to job1, these 3
> breakpoints will be removed. If changed back to job0, these 3
> breakpoints will appear again. Currently what I have done is that
> I removed the breakpoint icon only if the job is changed. That
> mean the breakpoint marker is still here and only change its icon
> to null. There are two reasons I did like this.
>
> 1. If removed the marker if the changed is changed, the breakpoint
> manager will notice that changed. It may cause debugger to
> removing the breakpoint. Or the breakpoint cannot be hit if the
> job is changed.
>
> 2. In the breakpoints view, there should contain different types
> of breakpoints, such as java breakpoint, parallel breakpoint and
> cdt breakpoint. If I removed some parallel breakpoints when the
> job is changed, it seems not quite standard.
>
> How do you think?
>
> Regards,
> Clement
> _______________________________________________
> ptp-dev mailing list
> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
>
_______________________________________________
ptp-dev mailing list
ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
_______________________________________________
ptp-dev mailing list
ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev