From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Received: (qmail 6792 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2003 22:28:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 10 Jan 2003 22:28:52 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18X9WZ-0005NT-00; Fri, 10 Jan 2003 18:29:19 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18X7eE-0002iS-00; Fri, 10 Jan 2003 17:29:06 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 22:28:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Elena Zannoni Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/PATCH] breakpoint.c: fix until command Message-ID: <20030110222906.GA10424@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3E162537.63F529DF@redhat.com> <20030104015356.GA23728@nevyn.them.org> <15897.65265.595543.449396@localhost.redhat.com> <3E1A2CE3.9325A6F@redhat.com> <15898.12832.906305.726378@localhost.redhat.com> <3E1A36AD.78DAFA63@redhat.com> <20030107043155.GA5806@nevyn.them.org> <15900.41570.285605.939997@localhost.redhat.com> <20030109015304.GB8431@nevyn.them.org> <15903.18765.971760.699556@localhost.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15903.18765.971760.699556@localhost.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00428.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 05:29:33PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > > On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 05:12:50PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote: > > > I don't much like having options, it's too much to type. :-) I think > > > we should leave the until as it is, name and all. Or it will confuse > > > people even more. I like 'to' as a possible simple name for the other > > > form. Or 'through'. > > > > The problem is, neither to or through makes sense to me as an option; I > > can't figure out what it will do. > > > > Not as an option, I was thinking as a separate command. Sorry, so was I. I can't see what "to" would do, really. > (to tell you the through, it should just be an argument to 'continue'). I suppose, but then we're back where we started. continue continue until foo continue to 34 [still not clear what the difference there is.] -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer