From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25266 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2011 13:26:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 25204 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Sep 2011 13:26:46 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:26:24 +0000 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=EU1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1R9Gd5-0006vQ-9c from pedro_alves@mentor.com ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 06:26:23 -0700 Received: from scottsdale.localnet ([172.16.63.104]) by EU1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:26:21 +0100 From: Pedro Alves To: Matt Rice Subject: Re: Rename "info definitions"? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:28:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-11-generic; KDE/4.7.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Doug Evans References: <20110921190419.542512461A9@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <201109291154.17349.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201109291426.19579.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2011-09/txt/msg00532.txt.bz2 On Thursday 29 September 2011 13:33:37, Matt Rice wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:54 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > > On Thursday 29 September 2011 03:13:58, Matt Rice wrote: > >> +info macro [-all] [--] MACRO > >> + The info macro command has new options -all and --. The first or printing > >> + all definitions of a macro. The second for explicitly specifying the end > >> + of arguments and the beginning of the macro name. > > > > Why do we need [--]? MACROS can't start with `-', can they? > > not in cpp macros or m4 at least, > lisp/scheme macros allow them i'm not sure what else may, Ah, I now see you've put comments in that direction in the code. Sorry I missed them before. > I don't think any of the languages gdb currently supports allow it, > but not positive I'm not sure scheme macros would be a good fit for gdb's (C/preprocessor) macros infrastructure. > I figured someone would complain but at least there'd be a patch in > the archives... :-) Given that it's optional, I don't care that much. Fine with me to put it in. We could just add it back if we ever find a need though. If a language needing it for macros would require adding more such switches to other commands. -- Pedro Alves