From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6811 invoked by alias); 11 Aug 2004 18:53:17 -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 6801 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2004 18:53:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO barry.mail.mindspring.net) (207.69.200.25) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 11 Aug 2004 18:53:17 -0000 Received: from user-119a90a.biz.mindspring.com ([66.149.36.10] helo=berman.michael-chastain.com) by barry.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BuyDq-0004Wn-00; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:53:14 -0400 Received: from mindspring.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by berman.michael-chastain.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DB99A4B102; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:53:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:53:00 -0000 From: Michael Chastain To: cagney@gnu.org Subject: Re: [rfc/testsuite/mi] use gdb_get_line_number Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com Message-ID: <411A6B1A.nailOZS31UHES@mindspring.com> References: <41188B2A.nailK7Y1RD9SU@mindspring.com> <411A609D.3080306@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <411A609D.3080306@gnu.org> User-Agent: nail 10.8 6/28/04 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00401.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: ac> Yea, not really. basics.c:callee3 && basics.callee3.prolog? Okay, I'll take all the line numbers out of the test names, somehow. mec> # Locate line numbers in basics.c. mec> set line_callee4 [expr [gdb_get_line_number "callee4 ("]] mec> set line_callee4_plus_2 [expr [gdb_get_line_number "callee4 ("] + 2] ac> I'm wondering if the latter should be called: ac> line_callee4_past_prologue Now that you mention it, the "*_plus_2" names look dorky. Perhaps: set line_callee4_head [expr [gdb_get_line_number "callee4 ("]] set line_callee4_body [expr [gdb_get_line_number "callee4 ("] + 2] I like "line_foo_body", but "line_foo_head" sounds a little funny. Perhaps "line_foo_definition" or "line_foo_defn". I don't like "line_foo_prologue" because these are lines in the source file, and the prologue is a property of the object code. I'll work up another RFC. Michael C