Re: [RFC] Alternate approach to keeping convenience variables

Eli Zaretskii
2006-01-27T17:53:54Z

> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 16:31:18 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Andrew STUBBS <andrew.stubbs@st.com>, Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>
>
> This version of the patch addresses all the comments I've received,
> except for:
>
> - TYPE_ZALLOC. I think this is more appropriate as a macro,
> personally, though I wouldn't argue too loudly if someone wanted to
> functionify it at the same time as TYPE_ALLOC.
>
> GDB developers seem to have developed an allergy to C macros that
> I just don't understand. They're not _inherently_ obfuscating
> or evil! They can be both useful and elegant.

FWIW, I never understood the ``macros are bad, m'kay?'' policy,
either.

> - gdbint; I couldn't find a vaguely appropriate place to add a
> description of this, and I don't think it's such a fascinating
> approach that it's worth creating a new section for.

At this point, I wouldn't bother about the structure of
gdbint.texinfo, just about getting the information in there. The
structure is a mess anyhow; in particular, there are too few nodes and
too many sections that lack a node.

But it is useless to try to fix structure when the full extent of the
information is not known even approximately.

So, if you have time, just add a section somewhere, even if it is
short. I think it's important to document this piece of information.

> I noticed in the course of updating gdb.texinfo that there are still a
> whole lot of references to VxWorks. GDB no longer supports VxWorks,
> and current versions of VxWorks don't speak a compatible protocol to
> the one that GDB used to support, anyway. Ripping this out will be a
> little more work than I have time for at the moment though.

Thanks for the heads-up, I will try to remember to do that when I have
my next Rainy Day(tm).

> Index: src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
> ===================================================================
> --- src.orig/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo 2005-12-03 07:44:31.000000000 -0500
> +++ src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo 2006-01-22 16:20:46.000000000 -0500
> @@ -10821,11 +10821,11 @@ table and program to run from the same f
> @code{symbol-file} with no argument clears out @value{GDBN} information on your
> program's symbol table.
>
> -The @code{symbol-file} command causes @value{GDBN} to forget the contents
> -of its convenience variables, the value history, and all breakpoints and
> -auto-display expressions. This is because they may contain pointers to
> -the internal data recording symbols and data types, which are part of
> -the old symbol table data being discarded inside @value{GDBN}.
> +The @code{symbol-file} command causes @value{GDBN} to forget the contents of
> +some breakpoints and auto-display expressions. This is because they may
> +contain pointers to the internal data recording symbols and data types,
> +which are part of the old symbol table data being discarded inside
> +@value{GDBN}.
>
> @code{symbol-file} does not repeat if you press @key{RET} again after
> executing it once.

This part is approved.

I also skimmed the other parts of the patch and didn't see anything I
would disapprove.