From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12406 invoked by alias); 30 Aug 2006 12:33:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 12392 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Aug 2006 12:33:47 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fra-del-04.spheriq.net (HELO fra-del-04.spheriq.net) (195.46.51.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:33:33 +0000 Received: from fra-out-01.spheriq.net (fra-out-01.spheriq.net [195.46.51.129]) by fra-del-04.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k7UCXU7s031825 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:33:30 GMT Received: from fra-cus-02.spheriq.net (fra-cus-02.spheriq.net [195.46.51.38]) by fra-out-01.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k7UCXSY1028853 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:33:29 GMT Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by fra-cus-02.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k7UCXQxP010555 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK); Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:33:27 GMT Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 0C122DA45; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:33:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail1.cro.st.com (mail1.cro.st.com [164.129.40.131]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id B08D347509; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:33:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from crx549.cro.st.com (crx549.cro.st.com [164.129.44.49]) by mail1.cro.st.com (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id CIH91472 (AUTH "frederic riss"); Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:33:24 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [RFC] New threadnum command for breakpoints From: Frederic RISS To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <1155716115.28300.526.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> References: <1154093921.28300.236.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <1154093921.28300.236.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <20060728141339.GA15103@nevyn.them.org> <1154098563.28300.282.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <20060728151434.GA17238@nevyn.them.org> <1154334744.28300.302.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <20060731125311.GA1272@nevyn.them.org> <1154354425.28300.335.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <1154376407.5120.27.camel@funkylaptop> <20060808182207.GE24779@nevyn.them.org> <1155066173.5130.52.camel@funkylaptop> <1155716115.28300.526.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 07:23:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1156941204.3429.252.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg00227.txt.bz2 ping? > > > If you want it to be the last stopped thread, which seems reasonable, > > > is there a better name we could give it? Or is $_gdb_thread > > > sufficiently clear? > > > > I'm not sure. The name itself looks fine to me but, speaking as a user, > > I find the leading '_' a bit strange. It seems to imply something about > > the variable, but it's not clear what. > > If it was a convention and all variables would share the same prefix, > > then it wouldn't feel so strange. On the other side if we want to use a > > common convention we've got to start somewhere. > > Anyway that's just a personal feeling, and really no big deal, maybe > > others could share their opinion? > > Nobody seems to care. How about we go on with the current patch (modulo > the doco fix that Eli requested)? > > Current patch: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2006-07/msg00434.html > > Fred. >