From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31576 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2008 18:58:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 31568 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Aug 2008 18:58:52 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 18:58:13 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 800B7983EF; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 18:58:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209F3983A9; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 18:58:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KQRjW-0002R3-Cd; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:58:10 -0400 Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 18:58:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: bauerman@br.ibm.com, tromey@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA][patch 1/9] Yet another respin of the patch with initial Python support Message-ID: <20080805185810.GA9337@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , bauerman@br.ibm.com, tromey@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1217818243.9336.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080804121451.GA13640@caradoc.them.org> <20080805020754.GA17244@caradoc.them.org> <20080805121908.GA17219@caradoc.them.org> <20080805182305.GA6840@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-08/txt/msg00084.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 09:49:18PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 14:23:05 -0400 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > Cc: bauerman@br.ibm.com, tromey@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > > > When executing Python code, uncaught Python exceptions are translated > > to calls to the @value{GDBN} error-reporting mechanism. If > > @value{GDBN} does not handle the error, it will terminate the current > > operation and print an error message containing the Python exception > > name, the associated value, and the Python call stack backtrace at the > > point where the exception was raised. Example: > > As I said, I don't see the (marginal, IMO) case of Python invoked by > something other than a command worth obscuring this already quite > complicated description. So I suggest to reinstate "command" in the > second sentence, since this is the most frequent situation users will > see. OK, let's use command then. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery