From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 581 invoked by alias); 15 May 2006 15:10:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 572 invoked by uid 22791); 15 May 2006 15:10:26 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 May 2006 15:10:24 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FfeiE-0007WT-SS for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 15 May 2006 11:10:22 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 15:50:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: CLI and GDB/MI documentation patch Message-ID: <20060515151022.GB28766@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060512011730.GA26655@brasko.net> <20060512124940.GB3860@nevyn.them.org> <20060512135802.GA6472@nevyn.them.org> <20060512183723.GA14434@nevyn.them.org> <20060512190152.GA15416@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00328.txt.bz2 On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 12:21:32PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > If you feel we should tell how to create a front end and/or a stub > > > that supports several versions of GDB/MI or remote protocol, that's > > > fine by me, but let's have sections whose focus is to provide tips to > > > such programmers, not to tell the history of MI or the protocol's > > > evolution. That's quite a different attitude than what Bob wrote. > > > > I do think that such a section would be useful. I'm not entirely sure > > about the distinction you are drawing, though. Is it a "what" versus > > "why" difference? > > No. When you write a Tips section, you in essence write a cookbook, > and the logic of the text (i.e. what you tell, how, and in which > order) is in accordance with that. That is, you pick up an issue and > give tips relevant to that issue, and while at that, you also say > things like ``Note that versions of GDB older than X.YZ didn't support > the -mi-frobnicate command, so you will have to use -mi-hack as a > workaround with those versions, which has this-and-that > disadvantage.'' Then you pick up another issue, etc. > > By contrast, the logic of text posted by Bob was chronological: ``In > the beginning, we did this; later we started to do that; so now you > could solve this with such-and-such methods.'' Do you see the > difference? I think so. Thanks. Anyway, there is absolutely no chance that I will have time to work on this, so from my point of view it's somewhat hypothetical. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery