From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-58975-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 14087 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2008 17:58:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 14079 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Oct 2008 17:58:57 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 17:58:20 +0000
Received: from mailhost3.vmware.com (mailhost3.vmware.com [10.16.27.45]) 	by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C30E57006; 	Fri,  3 Oct 2008 10:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.92.59] (promb-2s-dhcp59.eng.vmware.com [10.20.92.59]) 	by mailhost3.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71614C9A6E; 	Fri,  3 Oct 2008 10:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <48E65CEF.9080004@vmware.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 17:58:00 -0000
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,   "drow@false.org" <drow@false.org>,  "pedro@codesourcery.com" <pedro@codesourcery.com>,   "teawater@gmail.com" <teawater@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Reverse Debugging, 5/5
References: <48E3CD66.9020600@vmware.com> <umyhmixqu.fsf@gnu.org> <48E550B0.1070103@vmware.com> <uk5cqi4cx.fsf@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <uk5cqi4cx.fsf@gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00091.txt.bz2

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:52:32 -0700
>> From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
>> CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
>>  "drow@false.org" <drow@false.org>,
>>  "pedro@codesourcery.com" <pedro@codesourcery.com>,
>>  "teawater@gmail.com" <teawater@gmail.com>
>>
>> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>
>>>> +  add_com ("reverse-next", class_run, reverse_next, _("\
>>>> +Step program backward, proceeding through subroutine calls.\n\
>>>                         ^
>>> Won't commands like "apropos" stop at the first comma when they
>>> display the short descriptions of commands?
>> Hmmm, you know, "next" has the same issue.
>>
>> (gdb) apropos next
>> [...]
>> next -- Step program
>> nexti -- Step one instruction
>>
>>
>> ... why does it stop after a comma, anyways?
> 
> I have no idea, it's something that came into existence long before I
> started hacking GDB.

Daniel Berlin, May 2000


> I'd say, if not too many doc strings use the comma at the end of the
> first line, let's modify them to use a period, and remove this
> annoying limitation, leaving only the period.  WDYT?

Sounds good to me...