From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26544 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2008 05:05:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 26533 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2008 05:05:22 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:05:05 +0000 Received: (qmail 20948 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2008 05:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (vladimir@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 12 Jun 2008 05:05:03 -0000 From: Vladimir Prus To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [mi, doc] mention escape sequences Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:37:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200806111807.25820.vladimir@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806120905.08861.vladimir@codesourcery.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-06/txt/msg00231.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 11 June 2008 23:06:22 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Vladimir Prus > > Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:07:25 +0400 > > > > Note that parse_escape function supports more than C language escape > > sequences, it seems, but given that the function has no comments on > > those sequences, and given that manual does not say anything about > > that either, I don't feel like reverse-engineering the code to > > document the exact rules. "As in C" as sufficient, I think, for MI > > manual. > > Maybe not all exact rules, but a single example would be good, I > think. After all ``escape sequences'' is a heavily overloaded term, > even with the "C" qualifier, and without an example, the reader might > be left in doubt. Okay, which texinfo markup should I wrap "\r" in? > > > Escape sequences are not allowed in @var{non-blank-sequence}. > > How do you mean ``not allowed''? Perhaps you mean ``not > interpreted'', i.e. output verbatim? Right; I'll adjust the text accordingly. - Volodya