Re: pr 11067 patch

Chris Moller
2010-02-13T18:56:21Z

On 02/13/10 06:49, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 16:48:13 +0100, Chris Moller wrote:
>
>> --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-var-display.exp 1 Jan 2010 07:32:03 -0000 1.34
>> +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/mi-var-display.exp 12 Feb 2010 15:38:07 -0000
>> mi_gdb_test "-var-evaluate-expression anone" \
>> - "\\^done,value=\"A\"" \
>> + "\\^done,value=\"A = \\(enum<anonymous>\\)0\"" \
>> "eval variable anone"
>>
>
> While it works with Eclipse should this format be used even for MI?
> MI doc says:
> returns its value as a string.
>
> It is true it may be the same what `print' doc says:
> By default, GDB prints a value according to its data type.
>
> Still IMO the representation "A = (enum<anonymous>)0" is not suitable for MI
> as it is not the intended type of a C expression.

Yeah, as I said last week, I've never been a fan of breaking historical
behaviour, something my original patch was designed to avoid.

This has gone way past ridiculous--it's time this whole thing was
resolved as WONTFIX and closed.

cm