Re: [RFA] parse_frame_specification (stack.c)

Fernando Nasser
2001-03-05T12:57:00Z

Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> Fernando Nasser wrote:
> >
> > David,
> >
> > The real problem here is that there is an ambiguity in this command
> > argument specification. If a frame is specified as an address, it
> > should be proceeded by a "*" as we do in the break command.
> >
> > It seems that problems like this have been encountered before. here is
> > the comment in the code that refers to s similar situation:
>
> See:
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/onlinedocs/gdb_7.html#SEC43
>
> I believe David is preserving documented behavour.
>

You got that right. I mentioned that we could fix the syntax (manual
included) so it is not any longer ambiguous.

Instead of inventing a syntax, I suggested that we do as we already do
with breakpoints. Numbers are breakpoints *NNNNNNNN are addresses. I
don't particularly like the breakpoints syntax. I wish people had used
"#N" to indicate a breakpoint number or a stack level. That would also
make things unambiguous.

But, anyway, frames at very low addresses are not very likely so I guess
we should just leave things as they are.

--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9