Re: RFC patch mi-cmds.c table format (pedantic)

[Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>]

First, have a look at:
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gdb&pr=496

> Hi Andrew, in this change:
>     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-08/msg00052.html
> 
> the mi-cmds table changed from this format:
> 
>   {"break-info", "info break %s", 0},
>   {"break-insert", 0, 0, mi_cmd_break_insert},
> 
> to this format:
> 
>   { "break-info", { "info break", 1 }, NULL, NULL },
>   { "break-insert", { NULL, 0 }, 0, mi_cmd_break_insert},
> 
> As you can see here, the use of 0 vs NULL is inconsistent,

That's cos it was converted using an emacs macro.

 > and the spacing on the close parens on the last arg is inconsistent.
 > The implied initialization of 0 is also used in many places.
 > All of this is valid, but it could be a bit more consistent.
 > So instead of
> 
> -  { "break-insert", { NULL, 0 }, 0, mi_cmd_break_insert},
> +  { "break-insert", { NULL, 0 }, NULL, mi_cmd_break_insert},
> 
> -  { "exec-step", { NULL, 0 }, mi_cmd_exec_step},
> +  { "exec-step", { NULL, 0 }, mi_cmd_exec_step, NULL},
> 
> -  { NULL, }
> +  { NULL, { NULL, 0 }, NULL, NULL}

ok, but perhaps don't bother with the trailing initializers.

Should I ask what motived this?

Andrew