Re: [patch+7.5] auto-load: User conveniences suggested by Doug Evans

[Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 20:14:52 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > +  scripts_directory_help = xstrprintf (_("\
> > > > +Automatically loaded %s%s%sGDB scripts\n\
> > > > +(named OBJFILE%s) are located in one of the directories listed by this\n\
> > > > +option.\n\
> > > > +This option is ignored for the kinds of scripts \
> > > > +having 'set auto-load ... off'.\n\
> > > > +Directories listed here need to be present also \
> > > > +in the 'set auto-load safe-path'\n\
> > > > +option."),
> > > 
> > > Here, the lines are unnecessarily too short, IMO.
> > 
> > I think there should be some clear decision what should the GDB output conform
> > to.  In this and the paragraph above we have exactly opposite opinions whether
> > to wrap the text or not.
> 
> The above simply looks aesthetically wrong to me.  Whatever standards
> we set, they should first and foremost be presentable.

I find the source form of the help text confusing the discussion here, let's
talk about the output only.  Formatting of the output into the source file
does not matter much I think.

--with python form:
(gdb) help set auto-load scripts-directory 
Set the list of directories from which to load auto-loaded scripts.
Automatically loaded Python scripts (named OBJFILE-gdb.py) and GDB scripts
(named OBJFILE-gdb.gdb) are located in one of the directories listed by this
option.
This option is ignored for the kinds of scripts having 'set auto-load ... off'.
Directories listed here need to be present also in the 'set auto-load safe-path'
option.

--without-python form:
(gdb) help set auto-load scripts-directory 
Set the list of directories from which to load auto-loaded scripts.
Automatically loaded GDB scripts
(named OBJFILE-gdb.gdb) are located in one of the directories listed by this
option.
This option is ignored for the kinds of scripts having 'set auto-load ... off'.
Directories listed here need to be present also in the 'set auto-load safe-path'
option.

Do you find anything aesthetically wrong with this output form and could you
suggest specific changes?

--without-python form is not perfect but I find it good enough for the less
common case of builds.


Thanks,
Jan