From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18494 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2005 04:16:18 -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 18425 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jul 2005 04:16:09 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 04:16:09 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1DtHbu-0007mq-2S; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:15:38 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 04:16:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Bob Rossi , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH: gdb/mi + doco] -var-update Message-ID: <20050715041538.GA29817@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , Eli Zaretskii , Bob Rossi , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20050617034329.GH17013@nevyn.them.org> <20050617140410.GA24575@nevyn.them.org> <20050703195630.GM13811@nevyn.them.org> <20050704050151.GA8321@nevyn.them.org> <17099.44050.219050.156429@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050715014341.GA23331@nevyn.them.org> <17111.13428.966975.183852@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17111.13428.966975.183852@farnswood.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00129.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 03:58:44PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > > This patch includes the missing files, and I redid the varobj change in > > a pedantically different way. Thanks for catching my goof there, by > > the way. And caught a bad argc check on -var-list-children that I > > think you picked up from me at some point. > > Your change is clearly more object oriented. I don't know why varobj.c is in > the gdb directory: it's only really used by mi-cmd-var.c. How about moving it > into the mi directory, or even merging it with mi-cmd-var.c to form one file? > That way all the static functions currently in varobj.c will be automatically > accessible to the functions currently in mi-cmd-var.c. I bet you've got only the GDB module checked out. Varobj was not written for MI - it was written for Insight (gdb/gdbtk/). > > How's it look? If it looks good to you, I'll check it in, and then you > > can commit the documentation and we can work out what happened to your > > testcase. > > Yes, it looks good to me. Perhaps I can test it more fully once you've > committed it. Now that the hectic release schedule of GDB has slowed down, I > think this is a good way to work. I'm not sure that you will agree, though. In general, it's not my favorite approach, but it's growing on me. I have checked in the patch now; feel free to check in the docs, since Eli approved them. We can sort out testcases next. BTW, if it's OK with you, I would prefer that you add new testcases rather than modifying existing ones. Yes, the ones that are there are slightly redundant. But changing what a test case is testing is bad form for long-term results analysis. > I think the behaviour should be governed by use not consistency. I don't > really have an opinion though as I will only use: Makes sense. I can see why displaying the type for -var-update seems less than useful - although if it displayed dynamic type... hmmm... well, something to think about much later. Now that this patch is in, I believe your current gdb-mi.el will work with CVS GDB. Is that right? If so, could you post it? I promise to look at it promptly. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC