From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5800 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2003 21:17:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 5760 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2003 21:17:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 14 Jan 2003 21:17:26 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0EKn0B06428 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:49:00 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0ELHEa29870 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:17:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (romulus-int.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.46]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0ELHDt07664 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:17:14 -0500 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id AC036FF79; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:21:35 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15908.32607.538419.462432@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:17:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] New 'to' command In-Reply-To: <20030114210759.GA6615@nevyn.them.org> References: <15905.49160.629338.929610@localhost.redhat.com> <3E24712A.6070007@redhat.com> <15908.31903.55650.855348@localhost.redhat.com> <20030114210759.GA6615@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00539.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 04:09:51PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote: > > Fernando Nasser writes: > > > Sorry to get back to the name thing. But I believe the discussion concentrated > > > more on the semantics of the two commands and how until would be implemented -- > > > nobody was specifically fond of the names that came up in any case. > > > > > > What about "advance-to"? You can add "to" as an alias, I don't mind (although I > > > don't thing we need/should as typing "adv" will suffice).. > > > > > > I believe it captures the idea of what the user is trying to do in this case. > > > > I like it. > > going once, going twice, sold ? > > Until stays in this stack frame, advance-to goes to anything as long as > the frame doesn't exit? Sold to me. Thanks for the name, Fernando! > yes, until is untouched. Same as it was. Advance is for the new command. Ok. Phew! Elena > > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz > MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer