From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9457 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2005 23:58:46 -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 9441 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jun 2005 23:58:42 -0000 Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:58:42 +0000 Received: from farnswood.snap.net.nz (p209-tnt2.snap.net.nz [202.124.108.209]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F9A550B6E; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:58:40 +1200 (NZST) Received: by farnswood.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 501) id 830D962A99; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 01:00:29 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17072.49436.811019.408854@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:58:00 -0000 To: Bob Rossi Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Removal of markup annotations In-Reply-To: <20050615233529.GC21803@white> References: <17071.40307.949193.158796@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050615154057.GB20778@white> <17072.46112.23475.26195@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050615233529.GC21803@white> X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00213.txt.bz2 > > > Out of all of the annotations that you are removing here, CGDB only > > > depends on annotate_breakpoints_headers, annotate_field, > > > annotate_breakpoints_table, annotate_record and > > > annotate_breakpoints_table_end. > > > > These are undocumented annotations and just mark up the output. Could > > you parse it from the syntax instead? > > These were documented when I wrote the CGDB annotation subsystem. > Between now and then, someone changed the documentation. > > This link may work to demonstrate the fact. > http://web.archive.org/web/20030627071226/sources.redhat.com/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb_toc.html OK but they still just mark up the output. > I could look into parsing the syntax, but I would prefered if these > stayed. Is this not desirable for some reason? They make the code in breakpoint.c harder to read. It's a question of balancing the inconvenience of keeping them with that of removing them. Nick