From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20632 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2006 18:35:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 20623 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jun 2006 18:35:30 -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; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:35:29 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FqDja-0004Dq-Lw for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 14:35:26 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:35:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: Remote "qSupported" features probe Message-ID: <20060613183526.GA15966@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060612195313.GA11276@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: 2006-06/txt/msg00194.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 09:21:37PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > +@table @samp > > +@item @var{stubfeature} @r{[};@var{stubfeature}@r{]}@dots{} > > +The stub supports or does not support each returned @var{stubfeature}, > > +depending on the form of each @var{stubfeature} (see below for the > > +possible forms). > > +@item > > +An empty reply indicates that @samp{qSupported} is not recognized, > > +or that no features needed to be reported to @value{GDBN}. > > Did you look at how this empty @item is typeset in the printed version > of the manual? I suspect it won't do what you want. Perhaps saying > "(@emph{empty})" explicitly will look better. Hmm. We already use a bare @item in several places, so I didn't think to check. It comes out as `' in the appropriate font; do you think that's OK? Otherwise, the (empty) appears inside the quote marks and in @samp. I actually think best would be "@samp{} (empty)", but I don't know how to do that without removing the @samp from the @table and adding it to the other reply explicitly. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery