On Wed, 5 Jan 2022, 01:50 René Ferdinand Rivera Morell, <
grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 2:21 PM Jonathan Wakely via SG15 <
> sg15_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 at 15:04, Ben Craig via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> IMO, we need a function that is an unconditional breakpoint, similar to
>>> what the various compile builtins already provide. This could be in
>>> addition to the conditional breakpoint. The conditional breakpoint can be
>>> built from the unconditional breakpoint + is_debugger_present, so we should
>>> provide the lower level building block.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My personal preference is that the unconditional breakpoint gets the
>>> “good” name of std::breakpoint, but I can live with the conditional
>>> breakpoint getting the good name.
>>>
>>
>> Or make it std::breakpoint(bool).
>>
>
> I was wondering how long it would be until someone suggested that :-) I
> also thought about that after I had posted the papers (such are things that
> come to one's mind after the fact). And that seems like a most sensible
> approach.
>


Maybe give it a default argument too. The difficulty then is whether it
should default to true or false, and whether true should mean conditional
or unconditional.