From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [rfc] python API exposing inferior's frame stack.
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 03:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1237160806.8098.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ur60yr3rw.fsf@gnu.org>
El dom, 15-03-2009 a las 21:21 +0200, Eli Zaretskii escribió:
> > From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com>
> > El mar, 10-03-2009 a las 21:35 +0200, Eli Zaretskii escribió:
> > > Is "older" widespread enough to be self-explanatory?
> >
> > "older" is the name of the Frame method used to get the previous frame
> > (where "previous" is the convention used in the GDB source code), so it
> > has a good chance of being clear to the user of the Python API. In any
> > case, I reworded it to:
> >
> > "Return an integer representing the reason why it's not possible to find
> > frames older (outer) than this."
>
> I prefer "frames previous to this one". We already use similar
> wording in frame_stop_reason_string.
I don't like "previous" and "next". They are not clear enough. I think
you prefer this only because you're used to its meaning in the GDB
source code. If they were clear enough, the following clarification
wouldn't be necessary in frame.h:
/* Given a FRAME, return the next (more inner, younger) or previous
(more outer, older) frame. */
extern struct frame_info *get_prev_frame (struct frame_info *);
extern struct frame_info *get_next_frame (struct frame_info *);
I explicitly avoided such wording in the Python Frame API, preferring to
use "older" and "newer". In the doc strings and documentation, I also
use "outer" and "inner", which I still think conforms to be stack
chapter in the GDB manual.
> > > > +@defmethod Frame older
> > > > +Return the frame immediately older (outer) to this frame.
> > > > +@end defmethod
> > > > +
> > > > +@defmethod Frame newer
> > > > +Return the frame immetidaely newer (inner) to this frame.
> > > > +@end defmethod
> > >
> > > Suggest to use "higher" or "above" or "towards the outermost frame".
> > > Generally, try to use the terminology from the "Examining the Stack"
> > > chapter of the manual.
> >
> > IMHO, "inner" and "outer" are already conforming to the terminology from
> > the "Examining the Stack" chapter. It is a bit awkward to use "towards
> > the outermost frame" to describe these methods, e.g.:
> >
> > "Return the next frame in the direction towards the outermost frame."
> >
> > and
> >
> > "Return the next frame in the direction towards the innermost frame."
> >
> > Mmm... Now that I tried, doesn't sound too bad. But still I find my
> > original wording more direct and simpler to understand. What do you
> > think?
>
> We use "innermost" in the manual much more than "inner". You can also
> use "previous" and "next" if you like that better.
Why "innermost" is acceptable but "inner" is not? I don't see why the
different treatment. If one can be used, the other should be allowed
too, no?
> Also note that there's a typo in the quoted fragment ("immetidaely").
Fixed, thanks.
--
[]'s
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-15 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-10 18:00 Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-03-10 23:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-03-15 18:35 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-03-15 19:30 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-03-16 3:36 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2009-03-16 4:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-03-20 23:04 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-03-21 8:34 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-03-30 5:33 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-03-30 18:35 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-03-30 19:09 ` Tom Tromey
2009-03-30 19:24 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-03-30 19:57 ` Tom Tromey
2009-03-30 20:50 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-03-22 16:00 ` Tom Tromey
2009-03-17 21:13 ` Tom Tromey
2009-03-17 22:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-03-18 0:35 ` Tom Tromey
2009-03-18 4:12 ` Eli Zaretskii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1237160806.8098.8.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=bauerman@br.ibm.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox