From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 683 invoked by alias); 28 Dec 2011 16:30:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 660 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Dec 2011 16:30:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 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; Wed, 28 Dec 2011 16:29:56 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2882BADA5; Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:29:55 -0500 (EST) 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 AKmQC7WN00I9; Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:29:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCC2A2BAC5A; Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:29:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0F848145615; Wed, 28 Dec 2011 08:29:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 17:23:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Paul Hilfinger , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Have block_innermost_frame start from selected frame Message-ID: <20111228162936.GO23376@adacore.com> References: <20111227195809.672D892BF6@kwai.gnat.com> <20111228130130.GA1855@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20111228153008.GN23376@adacore.com> <20111228155657.GA10556@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111228155657.GA10556@host2.jankratochvil.net> 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: 2011-12/txt/msg00875.txt.bz2 > I find that GDB should ask or at least warn more in general. OK, I see why you are suggesting queries and menus, now. I think that generally speaking, we're trying to be less verbose, to make sure that any important message does not get drowned as you explain. Similarly, I would like us to limit the number of queries and menus to the minimum as well. That's why the multiple-symbols setting is set to "all" rather than "ask", for instance. I realize it's a matter of opinion, and people can easily disagree. No problem. But I think we can easily do without the query here. As I said, the old behavior can be reproduced. The new behavior is more versatile. And, to me at least, and the few at AdaCore who discussed this, we all concluded that the new behavior made more sense than the old. > > It's the only way to get the value of "var" in our testcase, and you > > cannot currently do it with the old behavior. > > You can already do so many things with GDB, just people do not do even > 5% of them because it is all too magic to learn. You are probably right, but following your logic, we should dumb GDB down. Many times, that's a good thing, I agree. But I don't think that's always the case. And I do think that it goes against general usability in our situation. -- Joel