Re: [PATCH] -stack-info-frames

Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-20T00:01:11Z

On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 10:24:19AM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote:
> I wasn't trying to make up the rules, just interpret them. I posted a very
> similar patch earlier which was reviewed. As no branch/release is imminent,
> it seemed a safe thing to do. I know not to apply judgement again. Sorry.

OK, thanks.

> > If you have trouble juggling patches, have a complete checkout for each
> > independent project you are working on. That's not hard to do.
>
> I'll have to work out a new routine. Contributing to Emacs works differently.

It's a serious suggestion - I often have a tree for everything I'm
working on, and that lets me make sure that I keep things independent.

> > > This commit is slightly different in two respects:
> > >
> > > 1) mi_cmd_stack_info_frame uses print_frame_info instead of
> > > print_stack_frame. This follows mi_cmd_stack_list_frames and means
> > > that the argument values aren't printed.
> > >
> > > 2) The documentation for -stack-info-frame previously said (before I
> > > removed it) "Get info on the current frame.". I've corrected this to
> > > "Get info on the selected frame." I've also removed the argument
> > > values from the example as explained in 1).
> >
> > Despite the fact that you made it up as you went along. Why did you
> > decide that this change was a better idea?
>
> Which change?

#1. Why not print the arguments? I guess your logic is that if you
want them, you can find them by a round trip through
-stack-list-frames, is that it?

> The patch was OK but the diff wasn't. I picked up the backup copy by mistake:

Great! Thank you.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC