From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23689 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2010 10:37:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 23676 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Apr 2010 10:37:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=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, 22 Apr 2010 10:37:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32DD72BAC0A for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 06:37:21 -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 B-xiMZ7fhZoX for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 06:37:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3CF42BAB82 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 06:37:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CA7AEF5895; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 03:37:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 10:37:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Do not treat '\' as escape character on MinGW Windows hosts Message-ID: <20100422103718.GG19194@adacore.com> References: <20100421203354.GD6588@adacore.com> <20100421220828.GA19620@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20100422001714.GD19194@adacore.com> <20100422023421.GA20111@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100422023421.GA20111@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-04/txt/msg00740.txt.bz2 > I agree too except when we're talking about something that is > essentially a UNIX tool. And, I don't see how you can talk about the > pain of doubling up the backslashes if you're talking about cutting and > pasting. Perhaps I shouldn't have based some of my argumentation on convenience, since the degree of convenience varies from user to user [1], and thus is a weak argument at best. What we need to decide, as a group, is whether GDB is indeed a Unix tool, and whether GDB should treat the Windows users as Unix users stuck on Windows (I definitely feel that way everytime I have to do Windows work). However, my observation of the group of users that sent me some feedback do not have that perception at all. For them GDB is just a tool, not a Unix tool, so they do not understand why GDB does not accept valid Windows paths. > I know I'll be outvoted here but I I hate cluttering code with MS-DOS > workarounds. Understood, and it's not obvious to me that you'll be outvoted. This is why I am asking for comments more than a review at this point. I would like to challenge the "workaround" term, though :-P. I much as I dislike Windows (and believe me, I really dislike this platform), I think that if we are going to support Windows, we should support it as a first class citizen. -- Joel [1]: Most of my Windows work is done remotely from a Linux machine, where copy/pasting is super easy (I have ctrl-y configured to paste in my xterm).