From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7482 invoked by alias); 15 May 2012 17:14:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 7447 invoked by uid 22791); 15 May 2012 17:14:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,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; Tue, 15 May 2012 17:14:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4FHEEPI013852 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:14:14 -0400 Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4FHEBxc029176 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 15 May 2012 13:14:13 -0400 Message-ID: <4FB28EE3.6090807@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 17:14:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [5/5] fix test suite for MI output References: <87pqa6v8fo.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87pqa6v8fo.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> 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: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg00584.txt.bz2 On 05/14/2012 01:01 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I'm not sure whether this is reasonable to do or not, so I pulled this > patch out separately. Preface: I'm not an MI user, but I do use varobj. This isn't a protest or other demand for action, but I felt compelled to add my $2E-10, in hopes of coaxing other users to offer an opinion. > It is not too hard to fix varobj to disable this new setting, if that is > preferable for some reason. I really don't like this. UIs will now display arrays (what about other aggregate types like struct pointers?) this way, and in the context of varobj, it provides no additional information that the UI isn't already providing users: + my_array (int [10]) 0x12345678 Keith