From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15478 invoked by alias); 15 Aug 2008 04:13:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 15467 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Aug 2008 04:13:15 -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; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:12:36 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84AAD983B4; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:12:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E06698243; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:12:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KTqfx-0003z6-4p; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 00:12:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:13:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Thiago Jung Bauermann Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Fix python indented multi-line commands Message-ID: <20080815041233.GB16436@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Thiago Jung Bauermann , Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1218686123.8263.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1218742708.554.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1218742708.554.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> 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/msg00393.txt.bz2 On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 04:38:27PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 22:20 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Thiago Jung Bauermann > > > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Daniel Jacobowitz > > > Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 00:55:23 -0300 > > > > > > > Please don't call variables by mysterious names such as > > > > "special_processing". Please give that variable a meaningful name > > > > that would explain the purpose of this flag even without reading the > > > > code of the callers of this function. > > > > > > I agree. The argument has two effects though (stripping of leading > > > whitespace, and recognizing GDB control commands), so I had some > > > difficulty in finding a meaningful name for it. That's why I left it > > > with that one. It is now called parse_input, what do you think? > > > > "parse_commands"? Or maybe "only_end_cmd" (and reverse the tests)? > > parse_commands is good. Do we have a deal? :-) Yes, I think that sounds right. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery