From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 109329 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2017 15:23:21 -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 109309 invoked by uid 89); 14 Sep 2017 15:23:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1455 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 ESMTP; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 15:23:19 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A80DFC047B71 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 15:23:18 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com A80DFC047B71 Authentication-Results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=palves@redhat.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C6FA63770; Thu, 14 Sep 2017 15:23:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] Introduce gdb_chdir To: Sergio Durigan Junior References: <20170912042325.14927-1-sergiodj@redhat.com> <20170912042325.14927-4-sergiodj@redhat.com> <6f978544-e1d4-b921-2e10-6be7f0e6b563@redhat.com> <87vakluxb1.fsf@redhat.com> Cc: GDB Patches From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <564dbed5-841d-be08-7827-19c898a3d0b1@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 15:23:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87vakluxb1.fsf@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-09/txt/msg00384.txt.bz2 On 09/14/2017 04:14 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > On Wednesday, September 13 2017, Pedro Alves wrote: > >> On 09/12/2017 05:23 AM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: >>> +/* Perform path expansion (i.e., tilde expansion) on DIR, and return >>> + the full path. */ >>> + >>> +static std::string >>> +expand_path (const char *dir) >> >> Since this is particularly about tilde expansion, >> and a replacement for "tilde_expand", did you consider calling >> it gdb_tilde_expand and using it throughout? If this were an >> extern function, I'd press for having "tilde" in its name, >> to make the call sites a bit more obvious. > > Sure, no problem in renaming it. Just to clarify: when you mean "use it > throughout", are saying that this should be used to replace readline's > "tilde_expand" elsewhere on GDB? Yes, and no. Yes, by 'throughout' I meant elsewhere in GDB. But no, I'm not _saying_ it should. I'm really asking if you considered/thought about that. I think what I'm really wondering is whether tilde_expand and this new function behave exactly the same, or whether glob behaves a little different in some cases. If it behaves differently [and the differences are benign), then I get to wonder whether we should use it throughout so that different commands don't behave differently. E.g., does "cd *" behave the same before/after ? Or does 'glob' expand '*' while tilde_expand didn't? Thanks, Pedro Alves