From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20679 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2002 17:36:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20663 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2002 17:36:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Jul 2002 17:36:30 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA7F3E0D; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:36:29 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D40371D.6070603@ges.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:46:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020708 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: >, >>, and "tee" operators References: <20020723183956.GA28558@nevyn.them.org> <871y9ub6fj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20020723192325.GA30738@nevyn.them.org> <87d6te8a6o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20020723202051.GA5427@nevyn.them.org> <3D3F5BDF.2050209@ges.redhat.com> <20020725031026.GA20117@nevyn.them.org> <3D401D50.4030009@ges.redhat.com> <20020725161749.GA10862@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00511.txt.bz2 > I think this was raised before (fernando and I discussed it somewhere on >> gdb@). GDB is used on systems that are not even UNIX like (namely >> DJGPP), trying to tie the syntax to UNIX is such a good idea. GDB needs >> a syntax spec, the current piece meal aproach is regrettable :-( >> >> If the command was called ``log'' rather than ``tee'' then I don't think >> we would have problems with ``log -a''. (I'm not saying that log is the >> right name mind.) > > > Well, I find the DOS-ish '/' separator much nastier than '-' options. The `/' would most likely have come from VMS or a precursor. VMS has [had?] a remarkably well structured (too well structured?) CLI interface (I show my heritage :-). > A question of personal taste. ``log'' unfortunately is more like > ``tee'' than it is like redirection; how about a simple ``redirect'' > command? > > redirect [-a[ppend]] FILE [COMMAND] > log [-a[ppend]] FILE [COMMAND] Or `log/a FILE [COMMAND]' or, hmm, something like: set log write FILE set log redirect FILE set log append FILE show log and log[/a] FILE command-that-isn't-optional Same for redirect. Are you proposing that ``print/FMT'' gets replaced by ``print -FMT''. There shouldn't be two conflicting syntaxes. Andrew