Re: [PATCH 2/2] MI notification on record started and stopped

Pedro Alves
2012-09-14T14:13:58Z

On 09/14/2012 02:13 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> On 09/14/2012 08:08 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 09/14/2012 12:44 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
>>> On 09/14/2012 05:49 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>>>> The notification is like '=record-started,thread-group="i1"'.
>>>> ?? If this is a thread-group, why does i1 identify a_process_? Don't
>>>> you mean "thread group"?
>>>
>>> As matter of fact, this is an inferior, but in MI notification, we call "inferior" as "thread group", IIUC. So i1 identify an inferior. Your suggestion "the number assigned by @value{GDBN} to the inferior" is good to me.
>>
>> In these cases, I'd just go and copy what is written in other similar
>> cases already in the manual. Should make the end overall result a bit more
>> consistent. For example, borrowing from the "-add-inferior" command's text,
>> you'd get something like:
>>
>> "The notification has a single field, @samp{thread-group}, whose value is the
>> identifier of the thread group corresponding to the affected inferior."
>>
>
> How about this?
>
> The process record was either started or stopped in thread group
> @var{id}. The @var{id} is the identifier of the thread group
> corresponding to the affected inferior.

Nitpicking at this point, as I think that already conveys the necessary
info. But, I think "Execution log recording" would sound more natural
than "The process record". The mention of @var{id} twice looks
redundant, yet disconnected. So I'd suggest:

Execution log recording was either started or stopped on an
inferior. The @var{id} is the identifier of the thread group
corresponding to the affected inferior.

Thanks,
--
Pedro Alves