From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31076 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2013 13:03:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 31052 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2013 13:03:09 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:02:56 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1ID2qfi028896 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 08:02:52 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-18.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.18]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1ID2m0o020017 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 08:02:50 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 13:03:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: "Metzger, Markus T" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , "markus.t.metzger@gmail.com" Subject: Re: [rfc 6/8] record disas: omit function names by default Message-ID: <20130218130247.GA7250@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <1360859352-30399-1-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <1360859352-30399-7-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <20130215161049.GA6219@host2.jankratochvil.net> <831uchtp4y.fsf@gnu.org> <20130215183256.GA16845@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83sj4xs8hp.fsf@gnu.org> <20130215190955.GA18269@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00450.txt.bz2 On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:42:44 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote: > I don't insist on the names I gave those commands, but I'd rather we had a single > word for each command. Due to completion and GDB abbreviations I do not think a single word is required, as discussed occasionally in other cases on gdb-patches. > Consider the existing "list" and "backtrace" commands. With the same arguments, > they should be renamed into "list-source-lines" and "list-call-frames";-) I see the problem in that these names already have some established meaning now while you overload these names for a different functionality in btrace. > Jan described it nicely above: "it's a 'backtrace' into history, not into upper frames". > The term 'backtrace' suggests it's backwards and about functions. Being a "record" > sub-command suggests it's working on the execution log. I got used to it now but for new users it is not obvious enough. "backtrace" is very fundamental commands of GDB with well known semantics. Is that "record trace-functions" OK for you? > The "btrace list" command that Jan mentioned works on blocks, i.e. sequentially > executed code between two branches. This would be between "record list" and > "record backtrace". I have not added a similar command to "record". Is this the intended final state or do you still plan updating archer-mmetzger-btrace? I would find the "btrace ..." commands more suitable to be placed under "record btrace ...", so that one has all the available "record btrace ..." commands at one place with "record btrace ". There can be "btrace ..." ones as aliases to them (although I do not think it is needed, user can create an alias using the 'alias' command easily if needed). Thanks, Jan