Re: [PATCH] Add comment for mi_run_cmd_full

[Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@ericsson.com>]

On 14-05-21 06:26 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi Simon,
> 
>> 2014-05-21  Simon Marchi  <simon.marchi@ericsson.com>
>>
>> 	* lib/mi-support.exp (mi_run_cmd_full): Add comments.
> 
> Overall, this looks good to me. I wasn't aware of the history,
> so just did a little bit of catching up :-), but I confirm that
> the description you propose matches the actual behavior...
> 
>> +# use_mi_command selects whether MI or CLI commands are used by the
>> +# procedure.
>> +# args is passed to the command used to run the test program, "run" or
>> +# "-exec-run", depending on the value of use_mi_command. Therefore, if
>> +# use_mi_command is false, they are effectively args to the test program.
>> +# If use_mi_command is true, they are simply arguments to -exec-run.
>>  proc mi_run_cmd_full {use_mi_command args} {
>>      global suppress_flag
>>      if { $suppress_flag } {
>> -- 
>> 2.0.0.rc0
> 
> When speaking of the value of a variable, the variable name should be
> in all caps. For instance:
> 
> # USE_MI_COMMAND selects whether MI or CLI commands are used by the
> # procedure.

Ok.

> If I may suggest a different approach (anyone is welcome to comment
> on that too), it'd be useful to succintly say what the function does
> first, before getting into the details of the parameters. Also, I would
> group the semantics of each value of use_mi_command together. So,
> one example:
> 
> # Send the command to run the test program.
> #
> # If USE_MI_COMMAND is true, the "-exec-run" command is used.
> # Otherwise, the "run" (CLI) command is used.
> #
> # ARGS is passed as argument to the command used to run the test program.
> # Beware that arguments to "-exec-run" do not have the same semantics as
> # arguments to the "run" command, so USE_MI_COMMAND influences the meaning
> # of ARGS. If USE_MI_COMMAND is true, they are arguments to -exec-run.
> # If USE_MI_COMMAND is false, they are effectively arguments passed
> # to the test program.
> 
> I hope it helps!
> 

I think this is very clear. Should I post an updated patch ?