From: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH: gdb/mi + doco] -var-update
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 03:28:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16920.62599.166899.125474@farnswood.snap.net.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4218ACB1.6010508@gnu.org>
> it should use mi-getopt (which correctly [?] implements the MI input
> syntax). If you find doing this alters the commands semantics (quoting
> of parameters might be affected) then we'll need to introduce a new
> ``fixed'' command.
Hmm. I'm not very happy with adding another level of abstraction, at the
moment. I can see that it might force the command to have the right syntax
but, at least for me, it also makes the code quite unreadable.
This patch uses the same methods as applied to my previous ones for
-var-list-children and -stack-list-locals which, in fact, you guided me
through. mi-getopt was also available at that time.
Are you saying that you won't accept the current patch, with Eli's concerns
addressed, or is it possible to adapt for mi-getopt at a later stage, when
MI is more stable?
Nick
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-20 20:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-20 2:06 Nick Roberts
2005-02-20 5:02 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-02-20 5:51 ` Nick Roberts
2005-02-20 15:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-02-21 4:33 ` Nick Roberts
2005-02-21 7:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-02-22 9:23 ` Nick Roberts
2005-02-22 9:34 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-02-27 5:03 ` Nick Roberts
2005-02-27 16:53 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-02-27 16:56 ` Nick Roberts
2005-02-28 12:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-03-19 3:55 ` Nick Roberts
2005-04-01 1:51 ` Bob Rossi
2005-04-01 11:01 ` Nick Roberts
2005-05-02 2:06 ` Nick Roberts
2005-05-02 4:05 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-05-02 7:24 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-17 3:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-17 10:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-06-17 14:04 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-18 8:53 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-07-03 19:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-04 3:07 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-04 3:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-04 4:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-07-04 5:02 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-04 10:17 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-06 10:00 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-15 1:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-15 3:59 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-15 4:16 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-15 15:11 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-15 15:28 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-15 22:37 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-04 21:15 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-04 22:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-07-05 3:25 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-05 19:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-07-15 9:42 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-17 11:42 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-17 14:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-17 23:12 ` Nick Roberts
2005-02-21 2:36 ` Andrew Cagney
2005-02-21 3:28 ` Nick Roberts [this message]
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=16920.62599.166899.125474@farnswood.snap.net.nz \
--to=nickrob@snap.net.nz \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/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