Re: [MI RFC] entryval: MI access to entry values

Tom Tromey
2011-10-03T17:00:35Z

>>>>> "André" == André Pönitz <andre.poenitz@nokia.com> writes:

Jan> There should be already instead of:
Jan> {name="lost",arg="1",value="<optimized out>"}
Jan> rather:
Jan> {name="lost",arg="1",optimized_out="1"}

André> That's actually what I'd prefer, too. No magic in-channel strings
André> that need to be recognized and handled/translated separately, but
André> different kinds of data transferred in different channels.

FWIW this makes sense to me as well.

Can you file bugs for the cases you know about? At least for this one I
think we could handle it in a backward-compatible way.

One possible issue is that the errors gdb can see are open-ended, but
presumably this could be dealt with sensibly by proper documentation.

Tom