Re: [PATCH] add -s option to make -break-insert support dprintf

Hui Zhu
2013-04-15T13:34:22Z

On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Hui" == Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hui> + [ -s "@var{template},@var{expression}[,@var{expression}@dots{}]" ]
> Hui> + [ @var{location} ]
>
> Hui> +@item -s "@var{template},@var{expression}[,@var{expression}@dots{}]"
> Hui> +Set a dynamic printf breakpoint, described in @ref{Dynamic Printf}.
> Hui> +The @var{template} and @var{expression} should be within double
> Hui> +quotes and be escaped by being preceded with a backslash.
>
> MI already defines a quoting approach and allows multiple arguments.
> In fact one of its selling points is that it doesn't have to be as
> free-form as the CLI -- it can be more predictable for programs to use.
>
> So, I think the above approach is not that great.
> It adds a second layer of parsing to MI, I guess just to work around
> internal deficiencies in gdb.
>
> It seems like you could use positional arguments instead:
>
> -break-insert -s FORMAT LOCATION ARG ARG ARG ...
>
>
> I don't really understand the part about how the expressions should be
> in double quotes. The test suite doesn't do that:
>
> +mi_gdb_test "5-break-insert -s \"\\\"arg=%d, g=%d\\\\n\\\", arg, g\" $dp_location1" \
>
> I suggest just dropping that text. I think it probably means that the
> argument should be properly quoted for MI, but that is redundant.
>
> Tom

This design is because the MI inferior will auto convert the format
string of argument of mi command. But dprintf need format sting keep
the original of the format string. So I use the current format.

Thanks,
Hui