From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 49438 invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2017 17:00:43 -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 49376 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jan 2017 17:00:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=jerome, Jerome, Guitton, guitton X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:00:32 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5921561B85; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:00:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.4]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v0AH0TEA004451; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 12:00:30 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFA] candidates for ambiguous command in upper case To: Simon Marchi , Jerome Guitton References: <1484058324-5368-1-git-send-email-guitton@adacore.com> <20170110150731.GH9518@E107787-LIN> <20170110151944.GD27546@adacore.com> Cc: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <2c7e674b-e827-f433-cbaf-a3d1a20cba80@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:00:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-01/txt/msg00172.txt.bz2 On 01/10/2017 03:28 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2017-01-10 10:19, Jerome Guitton wrote: >> Yao Qi (qiyaoltc@gmail.com): >> >>> IMO, there is nothing wrong. There is no command starts from "EX". >> >> This is a bit weird to accept upper-case EXEC-FIL then... isn't it? >> >> (gdb) exec-fil >> No executable file now. >> (gdb) EXEC-FIL >> No executable file now. > > I agree that if GDB accepts commands in upper case, the ambiguous > command message should work accordingly. Agreed. I thought that the manual mentioned that gdb accepts commands in either case, but I can't find it now. > The message as it is, with an empty list, doesn't make sense. > > I also noticed that tab completion was case sensitive, should that be > fixed as well? > > For example, > > (gdb) inf > > shows "inferior info", but > > (gdb) INF > > shows nothing. Should it show "inferior info", or "INFERIOR INFO"? I think the former. I.e., show the canonical lowercase. That is likely to end up much easier and saner to implement. I've been playing with completion recently [1], and I've noticed that (gdb) handle sigu completes to: (gdb) handle SIGU (gdb) handle sig Or really: (gdb) handle sigu M-? SIGURG SIGUSR1 SIGUSR2 In my branch I've completely changed how GDB hands over completion matches to readline, and I've had to make sure to preserve that behavior, as caught by some test. [1] - this WIP branch gets rid of the need to quote linespecs as in "b 'function(int" among other things: https://github.com/palves/gdb/commits/palves/cp-linespec Thanks, Pedro Alves