From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30725 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2009 17:33:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 30717 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Oct 2009 17:33:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:32:59 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1112BAC65; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 13:32:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id LvOehuzDLLx5; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 13:32:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 363D42BABBC; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 13:32:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 920A2F589F; Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:33:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Paul Pluzhnikov , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC][patch] Allow to disassemble line. Message-ID: <20091008173249.GE11440@adacore.com> References: <20091002004954.8966C76B2B@ppluzhnikov.mtv.corp.google.com> <8ac60eac0910080916i5a2eb49an5f21f3b5c7fb96ef@mail.gmail.com> <20091008162350.GA8625@caradoc.them.org> <8ac60eac0910080952p46f15693x6ed339473db0139d@mail.gmail.com> <20091008172926.GA14975@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091008172926.GA14975@caradoc.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00177.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 01:29:26PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 09:52:35AM -0700, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > > If 'set disassemble-next-line on' worked as Daniel proposed, that would > > significantly reduce the need for 'disas/l', I think. > > For my two cents, I'd rather have both... consider x/i $pc and > display/i $pc. Me too. -- Joel