Re: GDB/MI Output syntax

[Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 03:46:52PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net> wrote:
> >
> >>>-@code{@var{async-record} | @var{stream-record}}
> >>>+@code{( @var{async-record} | @var{stream-record} ) @var{nl}}
> >
> >
> >I'm dubious about this.
> >
> >stream-record does not have an NL terminator and needs one, yes.
> >
> >But async-record already gets an NL terminator in the grammar
> >and does not need a second one.
> 
> That's kind of why, per my earlier post, I suggested moving all the 
> @var{nl} to the @var{output} production.  That way we can see exactly 
> where they fit in.

I don't think it would be possible to move all of the @var{nl} to the
output production. Not without making the output production very large.
This is because in several case's the newline is only outputted
conditionally, since some productions are optional.

I think the simple patch would be fine for now. Do you agree?

Thanks,
Bob Rossi