From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17612 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 2017 17:19:17 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 17599 invoked by uid 89); 17 Nov 2017 17:19:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KB_WAM_FROM_NAME_SINGLEWORD,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=philosophy, H*f:sk:4bca71a, H*f:sk:d4fd34d, his X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:19:16 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 878331163AF; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 12:19:14 -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 oDRE9u2E4C9r; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 12:19:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C611163AB; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 12:19:14 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A350B87459; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 09:19:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:19:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: problems with minimal symbols (without a type) Message-ID: <20171117171912.bzawwm7toooido6w@adacore.com> References: <20171109012540.ds5ixw4pq6rclhgc@adacore.com> <4bca71af-2877-2adf-9f54-e51d7e6b5b8b@redhat.com> <20171115013531.cwj5pzjttrihofhl@adacore.com> <20171115185204.qku477ejfyescpie@adacore.com> <4978e1ba-ecfe-15ad-5532-5cf543498543@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4978e1ba-ecfe-15ad-5532-5cf543498543@redhat.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-SW-Source: 2017-11/txt/msg00350.txt.bz2 > > My philosophy is been that it's OK, and sometimes good, to allow > > in the debugger something that's not allowed in the language, if > > it makes it easier for the user to do his debugging. Would allowing > > this as an extension be introducing possible confusion? > > Sorry, somehow I missed this question. I agree that sometimes > extensions are OK, but IMO, they need to have some clear advantage. > Since there's a just-as-easy way to do the same thing within the > language, IMO, we shouldn't add such an extension. I think that yes, > it can introduce confusion, and I could see someone reporting a bug > if they notice "&(int)global" works. FTR, sounds good to me. Thanks for taking the time to explain your thinking as well. -- Joel