From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>,
Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>,
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFA: "disconnect" command
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 01:06:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030617010611.GA21259@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3EEE56F5.C98744D9@redhat.com>
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 04:47:01PM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 10:01:16AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> > >
> > >> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Daniel> On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 09:29:42AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> > >> >> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
> > >> >> ...
> > >> Daniel> Refresher on this one: the patch adds a "disconnect" commad,
> > >> Daniel> and implements it for remote targets. "disconnect" leaves
> > >> Daniel> the target stopped, while "detach" usually resumes it.
> > >> Daniel> Useful with kgdb, gdbserver, et cetera.
> > >> >> Useful indeed. But there is nothing in the names "detach" and
> > >> >> "disconnect" that suggests how they differ. Would it be possible
> > >> >> to have command names that are suggestive of their action?
> > >>
> > >> Daniel> The last time I proposed this, we went back and forth for a
> > >> Daniel> week on names and this was the best we could come up with.
> > >> Daniel> Have you got a better suggestion?
> > >>
> > >> Nothing really promising. But how about doing this with an (optional)
> > >> argument on the "detach" command, e.g., "detach stop" and "detach go"
> > >> with the latter being the default?
> > >
> > >
> > > That's similar to what I suggested originally, though it makes a little
> > > more sense. If other people like it I'll switch, but I don't really
> > > think it's better than disconnect.
> >
> > There was:
> > connect / disconnect
> > attach / detach
> > as pairs.
>
> Argh. But "connect" isn't really analogous to attach.
> It's analogous to "target remote".
Well, there is no "connect" - in fact "target remote" is paired with
disconnect.
Still open to better ideas on the naming; but either way I'd like to
commit this before another release goes by...
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-17 1:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-14 4:26 Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-14 8:42 ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-06-16 13:31 ` Paul Koning
2003-06-16 13:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-16 14:01 ` Paul Koning
2003-06-16 14:38 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-16 15:05 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-16 23:47 ` Michael Snyder
2003-06-17 1:06 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2003-06-17 14:29 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-16 23:46 ` Michael Snyder
2003-06-17 14:59 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-17 22:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-17 22:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-06-19 1:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-18 14:22 ` Andrew Cagney
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=20030617010611.GA21259@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=msnyder@redhat.com \
--cc=pkoning@equallogic.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