From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id +4HLLnmTtGIXowQAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:23:21 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id AF5291E225; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:23:21 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=DkDWC8MZ; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BCBD1E15D for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:23:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5F253858C55 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 16:23:20 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A5F253858C55 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1656001400; bh=BclaFV3ipE4m0esqyfnFwxk0W6YDVC/TOUy33I2wg9E=; h=Date:To:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=DkDWC8MZNfL+OODLP3eZymWcI6kCo1nRuocSU0vXxwKEDXakwauteet0w2zeqByGe OP70KI8hW7nvoIepYmamwzmUNFbGB/zeaYRPCuMA1RZDzIgpRt0/yNsn3WTRZG6rdp OsoDnT3ghLHMAWPq7Uu7XiE2DNGjjkx1n/vxRw18= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [209.51.188.92]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16F23385AE78 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 16:21:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 16F23385AE78 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45972) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4Paa-0001EI-KQ; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:21:52 -0400 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=4765 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4Paa-0005FS-3d; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:21:52 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:21:44 +0300 Message-Id: <835ykre4fb.fsf@gnu.org> To: Andrew Burgess In-Reply-To: (message from Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches on Thu, 23 Jun 2022 17:05:14 +0100) Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] gdb/doc: update syntax of -data-disassemble command arguments References: X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 17:05:14 +0100 > From: Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches > Cc: Andrew Burgess > > The argument documentation looks like this: > > -data-disassemble > [ -s @var{start-addr} -e @var{end-addr} ] > | [ -a @var{addr} ] > | [ -f @var{filename} -l @var{linenum} [ -n @var{lines} ] ] > -- @var{mode} > > However, I believe, according to the 'Notation and Terminology' > section, this means that the there are 3 optional location > specification argument groups for the command, followed by a > non-optional '-- mode'. > > However, this is not true, one of the location specification must be > given, i.e. we can't choose to give NO location specification, which > is what the above implies. I don't believe we ever used this convention this rigorously. But I agree that it is better to be as accurate as possible. > I propose that we change this to instead be: > > -data-disassemble > ( -s @var{start-addr} -e @var{end-addr} > | -a @var{addr} > | -f @var{filename} -l @var{linenum} [ -n @var{lines} ] ) > -- @var{mode} > > By placing all the location specifications within '( ... )' we > indication that these are a group, from which one of the options, > separated by '|', must be selected. According to "Notation and Terminology", the (...) construct should be followed by either * or +, so I think you should use + here. Otherwise, this is fine, thanks.