From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2234 invoked by alias); 7 May 2003 14:24:46 -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 2224 invoked from network); 7 May 2003 14:24:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 May 2003 14:24:46 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19DPqu-00084j-00; Wed, 07 May 2003 09:25:01 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19DPqM-0000iH-00; Wed, 07 May 2003 10:24:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 14:24:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Elena Zannoni Cc: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Add new language: "unsupported" Message-ID: <20030507142425.GA2725@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Elena Zannoni , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20030507014231.GA3156@gnat.com> <16057.6050.991104.721761@localhost.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16057.6050.991104.721761@localhost.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00086.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 10:26:42AM -0400, Elena Zannoni wrote: > Joel Brobecker writes: > > As promised to Elena, this is a followup on: > > > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-04/msg00209.html > > > > Basically, I added a new "unsupported" language which support is > > minimalistic (identical to what we do with the "asm" language). > > I didn't fancy "partial": > > > > (gdb) show lang > > Current language: auto; currently partial > > > > I felt like it could confuse the user to think that "partial" is the > > name of a real language :-). But I'm not such a big fan of "unsupported" > > either, so all suggestions are welcome. > > > > minimal? I would think of 'basic' but that's obviously not good :-) > 'unsupported' to me would imply that you still get the errors. Minimal sounds like a good idea to me. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer