From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8848 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2004 15:00:50 -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 8841 invoked from network); 11 Feb 2004 15:00:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao04.cox.net) (68.1.17.241) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Feb 2004 15:00:49 -0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with ESMTP id <20040211150049.PHZJ19895.lakemtao04.cox.net@white>; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:00:49 -0500 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Aqvr6-0000eu-00; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:00:48 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:00:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] "tui" Message-ID: <20040211150048.GB2395@white> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <402923AD.7060104@gnu.org> <20040210184009.GA28778@nevyn.them.org> <20040210125326.6ae7e4ba@saguaro> <20040211131122.GA2333@white> <402A4086.9020702@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <402A4086.9020702@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00285.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 09:47:34AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 12:53:26PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > > >>On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:40:10 -0500 > >>Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >> > > > >>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 01:32:13PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > >>> > > >>> > This modifies the build machinery so that the program "tui" is built. > >>> > "tui" starts up GDB's TUI (or Text User Interface). Alternative > >>program > > names include "tgdb", "gdbtui", ... > >>> > > >>> > Comments? Otherwize look to commit it round 16th Feb. > > > >>> > >>> Any of those names sound great to me. I think that one with "gdb" in it > >>> would be clearer; unlike Insight, the TUI does not have a separate life > >>> from GDB. > > > >> > >>I too would prefer one of the names with "gdb" in it somewhere. > > > > > >I would also, I actually like the name gdbtui. It is clear that it is > >GDB, and it is clear that it is the text user interface. > > Then: > tui > or > tg > wouldn't work. > > Speaking of which, if that tcl/tk code ever integrated into GDB's code > base (assuming it's first contributed), it to will need a name: tclgdb, > tkgdb, and even gdbtk come to mind (ah, the ultimate irony). Well thats pretty funny, I thought the uninformed user would type gd and see gdb,gdbtui. That would be some pretty nice eye candy for those that didn't know that the tui was on there system. I like the idea of thinking that everything begins with gdb, to keep the names uniformed and easy to find. If the convention was gdbX, they would certainly be easy to find. For example gdb, gdbtui gdbtk Also, putting the name on the end gives the feel that the tui is part of GDB, and not just another front end. For example, it seems that most developers that write front ends add the abbreviation up front. A little proof would be, xxgdb tgdb kgdb cgdb I am sure there are others ... In all, I think the extension on the end would be a little proof that the exe is part of GNU GDB. Also, it would be easy to find with gd. Either way, I'll be interested to see what it ends up being. Bob Rossi