|
Subject: Re: [stella] Stella conditional breakpoint support RFC From: "Eric Ball" <ericball@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 22:39:44 -0400 |
Hmm, simple ORs could be handled via multiple entries for the same PC. But
obviously my idea doesn't handle more complex ops.
> My #1 biggest question though, was: should I even try to support
> conditions that aren't tied to a PC-based breakpoint or address-based
> trap? Your answer implies that I shouldn't ("check PC first..."), so I
> guess that counts as one vote against arbitrary conditions...?
Hmm, I'm trying to think of a non-watch case which wouldn't / couldn't be PC
based. Maybe some SP stuff. But the 6502 is so register constrained that I
can't image triggering a breakpoint without some constraints on PC.
Even if you were to allow arbitrary breakpoint conditions, I suspect that
90+% of the use would be for very constrained cases anyway.
Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsub & more at http://stella.biglist.com
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| Re: [stella] Stella conditional bre, B. Watson | Thread | Re: [stella] Stella conditional bre, Jeremy Penner |
| Re: [stella] Stella conditional bre, Jeremy Penner | Date | Re: [stella] Stella conditional bre, B. Watson |
| Month |