On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 21:52:54 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> It's pretty self-evident that if you put a breakpoint on the name of a
> function, you want it to break every time that function is called.

Perhaps, but it's also self-evident that the function *name* isn't 
executed, so it makes no sense to set a breakpoint on a line that 
contains non-executable code, since a breakpoint interrupts the flow of 
*executable* code. ;-)

> (It's also pretty self-evident that having some visual feedback about
> where you can and can't put breakpoints would help enourmously.)

Now *that* I can't argue with. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message