On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 03:00:58PM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote:
>  On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 01:12:00PM +0000, Nicholas Clark wrote:

>  > But is what we really want is a pair of new flag bits and names to turn on
>  > either behaviour individually, and if 0x02 is set, PERLDB_LINE carries on
>  > doing both?
>  
>  I don't think it's really needed in this case, though that's certainly a
>  good safe approach in general.
>  
>  If it's likely to get into 5.10.1 then I might be persuaded to implement
>  a more general patch that does that and also splits out more of the
>  currently bundled functionality into separate PL_perldb bits.

A very minimal patch that arrives within 24 hours is likely to get into
5.8.9-RC1, because I can't see anything that scary about just splitting
that one bit into two new ones.

As to 5.10.1 - I can't make you any promises about that :-)

Nicholas Clark