From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22575 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2009 08:09:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 22566 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Sep 2009 08:09:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout7.012.net.il (HELO mtaout7.012.net.il) (84.95.2.19) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:09:43 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout7.012.net.il by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KQI00A00P999Z00@i-mtaout7.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:09:03 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.70.48.81]) by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KQI002FSPB24V20@i-mtaout7.012.net.il>; Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:09:03 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:09:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH:doc] GDB/MI attribute names In-reply-to: <19131.17428.428101.481874@totara.tehura.co.nz> To: nickrob@snap.net.nz (Nick Roberts) Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <837hvnv45y.fsf@gnu.org> References: <19131.17428.428101.481874@totara.tehura.co.nz> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00780.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:04:04 +1200 > From: nickrob@snap.net.nz (Nick Roberts) > > This patch, slightly paranoid, document the current practice for attribute > names. I don't want future names to break exiting parsers. I agree, assuming that what you wrote is factually correct at this point, and that we have no good reasons to modify it VSN. Is that indeed so? > + @var{variable} expressions should be alphabetic words or comprise of > + alphabetic words separated by underscores. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Don't you meant "comprised of"? In any case, the text you suggests sounds a bit inaccurate to me. (Maybe I just don't know enough about MI, so please bear with me.) You say "variable expressions", but an expression can use operators, can't it? If it can, then the operators are not generally alphabetic characters. Based on my understanding of what you meant, I suggest to rephrase as follows: Every @var{variable} should be specified as a sequence of alphabetic characters and underscores. Does that reflect correctly what you wanted to say? Btw, are digit really "verboten"? If not, replace "alphabetic" with "alphanumeric" above. Thanks.