From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9837 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2012 20:18:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 9770 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Mar 2012 20:18:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_VT,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 20:17:38 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q21KHQvo012933 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 15:17:37 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q21HmS0F025422; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:48:29 -0500 Message-ID: <4F4FB66C.5010703@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 20:18:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [4/5] implement "info vtable" References: <87mx82prmd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4F4F8D39.60507@redhat.com> <878vjkjka1.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <878vjkjka1.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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: 2012-03/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2 On 03/01/2012 05:36 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > Pedro> My only gripe is that we end up with the vtable vs vtbl inconsistency > Pedro> (set print vtbl). > > Yeah. I was thinking of renaming 'set print vtbl' (keeping the old name > as an alias of course). WDYT? I think "vtable" is both clearer and > more commonly used. I have no problem with vtbl, but if you think vtable is clearer, fine with me. > Pedro> May be a good idea if the docs are augmented a bit to give an example, > Pedro> and lightly explain the output. > > Ok. > > Pedro> IIUC, "info vtable POINTER" works. The tests only sees to try > Pedro> "info vtable OBJ". Worth adding a test that tries through a pointer? > > Will do. Thanks. While at it, it might be worth it to add a test that tries "info vtable" (no arg), "info vtable foo" with a foo object that doesn't have a vtable, and perhaps also "info vtable some_scalar". -- Pedro Alves