From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6538 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2005 01:58:02 -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 6517 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jun 2005 01:57:59 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Jun 2005 01:57:59 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.51) id 1DjSar-0007ym-3G; Fri, 17 Jun 2005 21:57:57 -0400 Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 01:58:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] -stack-info-frames Message-ID: <20050618015756.GA30430@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17075.21529.964955.923197@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050617230130.GB21178@nevyn.them.org> <20050617231425.GA22254@nevyn.them.org> <17075.30993.384316.356236@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17075.30993.384316.356236@farnswood.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00273.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 01:29:53PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > > > Is "-stack-info-frame N" basically the same as "-stack-list-frames N N"? > > I didn't allow -stack-info-frame an argument. OK, lets forget this > implementation. Perhaps we could add something about "-stack-list-frames N N" > in the documentation. I know its kind of obvious, but I didn't realise > initially. > > How about the rest of the patch: > > (mi_cmd_stack_list_frames, mi_cmd_stack_info_depth): > Don't test for stack. > (mi_cmd_stack_select_frame): Do not allow an argument. > Don't test for stack. OK (except the changelog is wrong - it's Require an argument, not Do not allow, right?). A nice followup if you're feeling inspired would be to remove the traces of -stack-info-frame from both gdb/mi/ and the manual, since it really does not sound useful at this point. Not sure what we could add to the docs. This is what's there: If invoked without arguments, this command prints a backtrace for the whole stack. If given two integer arguments, it shows the frames whose levels are between the two arguments (inclusive). If the two arguments are equal, it shows the single frame at the corresponding level. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC