From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19893 invoked by alias); 16 Dec 2009 15:49:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 19884 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Dec 2009 15:49:45 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:49:39 +0000 Received: (qmail 25163 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2009 15:49:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 16 Dec 2009 15:49:37 -0000 Message-ID: <4B29018C.6060307@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:49:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hui Zhu CC: tromey@redhat.com, Joel Brobecker , Michael Snyder , gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [RFC] Let "gcore" command accept a suffix argument References: <20091211100558.GA7125@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-12/txt/msg00209.txt.bz2 Hui Zhu wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 03:20, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>>>> ">" == Hui Zhu writes: >>>>>>> >>>> Agree with you. Add " with variable make it oddness. >>>> What about change it to others, like: >>>> eval echo {++$a} >>>> >>>> Or add " to simple string, like: >>>> eval echo ++$a".core" >>>> Or >>>> eval echo ++$a'.core' >>>> >> What do you think of the idea of making it printf-like? >> > > It's not bad. But need a lot of extend work that the old patch don't have. > And this command doesn't need convert a value from 1 type to another. > So I want use the "" way. > BTW, Pedro nudges me out of my stupor and reminds me that the soon-to-be-posted tracepoint action to evaluate without collecting is also called "eval" (it was originally proposed as "do" but that ambiguates with "down", which seemed like a bad idea). The two versions are not necessarily mutually exclusive - the downloading at the start of a trace run gives us a chance to filter out eval's that don't make sense for the target agent - but if we go too afield on syntax (the tracepoint version is simply a comma-separated list of GDB expressions), then that's going to be more of a problem to reconcile. Stan