From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC]: remove inconsistency in printcmd.c: print_scalar_formatted
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040120012252.GA4828@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <400C7948.9060300@gnu.org>
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 07:41:44PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 05:57:04PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> >>>Ping. Could we continue discussing this topic and come to some form of
> >>>resolution? The new additional ia64 test failures are annoying.
> >
> >>
> >>I thought there was basic agreement with your change (It sux less then
> >>the current behavior :-). Yes, change it. That way, behavior such as:
> >> (gdb) print/x 1.0
> >>will at least be more consistent.
> >
> >
> >Yeah, I agree, and re-reading Kevin's message I don't think he objects.
> >
> >How do you all feel about a more sweeping change instead:
> >(gdb) set $doublevar = 2.0
> >(gdb) print doublevar
> >$1 = 2.0
> >(gdb) print (int) doublevar
> >$1 = 2
> >(gdb) print/x (int) doublevar
> >$1 = 2
> >(gdb) print/x doublevar
> >$1 = 0xc000000000000000
> >(gdb) print/i doublevar
> >???? [no preference really]
>
> No. That would be wrong. print/<format> prints the value (not the
> implementation) using the specified format. Being able to examine the
> underlying implementation in various formats is more of an "examine"
> command.
Andrew, please explain to us all how you can respond to "I think this
would be a better, different-than-the-current behavior" with "No, that
would be wrong".
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-20 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-12 20:36 Jeff Johnston
2003-12-12 22:17 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-12-12 23:05 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-12-13 0:55 ` J. Johnston
2004-01-19 22:23 ` J. Johnston
2004-01-19 22:57 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-01-19 23:18 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-01-19 23:27 ` Kevin Buettner
2004-01-20 0:41 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-01-20 1:22 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
[not found] ` <400C8CC0.3040706@gnu.org>
2004-01-20 5:48 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-01-20 6:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-01-20 14:52 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-01-20 19:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-01-20 19:33 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-01-20 20:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-01-20 16:50 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-01-20 19:10 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-01-20 21:29 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-19 22:53 ` Jeff Johnston
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=20040120012252.GA4828@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--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