From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 126965 invoked by alias); 13 Jul 2015 09:42:42 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 126956 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jul 2015 09:42:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:42:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A74C3708D8; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:42:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t6D9gb9O004698; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 05:42:38 -0400 Message-ID: <55A3880D.5090808@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:42:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Burgess CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/tui: Add command completion to winheight command. References: <1436534024-23458-1-git-send-email-andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <559FF19E.3010208@redhat.com> <20150712085140.GE5485@embecosm.com> <55A280B3.9050503@redhat.com> <20150712213449.GA3915@embecosm.com> In-Reply-To: <20150712213449.GA3915@embecosm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00371.txt.bz2 On 07/12/2015 10:34 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote: > * Pedro Alves [2015-07-12 15:58:59 +0100]: >> I don't really understand what "if appropriate" is referring to, though. > > I originally wrote "... are also included in the list of possible > completions." however, this is not true, if a window name has been > partially typed then clearly 'prev' or 'next' might not be included in > the list of possible completions (if say the partial window name > started with a 'c'). > > How about this wording: > > "If INCLUDE_NEXT_PREV_P is true then the special window names 'next' > and 'prev' will also be considered as possible completions of the > window name." > I like that. > Or feel free to suggest something simpler. Thanks, Pedro Alves