[RFC on command names] Re: [rfc 6/8] record disas: omit function names by default

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

Hi Markus,

thanks for summarizing it.  As everyone has his different naming opinion
choosing the IMO most clear naming by Eli (unless more opinions appear today).

> Eli:
> >    record instruction-history
> >    record source-lines-history
> >    record function-call-history


Thanks,
Jan


On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:34:02 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
> Markus:
> > >   record disassemble ......... instructions
> > >   record list ....................... source lines
> > >   record backtrace ............. functions
> 
> Jan:
> > I still find "record list-functions" and "record list-instructions" more clear
> > than "record backtrace" and "record disassemble".  Particularly as there is
> > the "list" word.
> > 
> > Sorry for "bikeshedding" it, additionally so late, I do not want to keep this
> > discussion longer anymore.
> 
> Eli:
> > > Maybe "record list-functions"?
> > 
> > How about "record trace-functions"?
> 
> Eli:
> >    record instruction-history
> >    record source-lines-history
> >    record function-call-history
> 
> Tom:
> > Jan> Maybe "record list-functions"?
> > 
> > "record history" or "record function-history"?