From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21652 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2009 10:02:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 21462 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Sep 2009 10:02:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout4.012.net.il (HELO mtaout3.012.net.il) (84.95.2.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:02:08 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i_mtaout3.012.net.il by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) id <0KQ500700VS60B00@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:02:04 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.39.235]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0KQ500KUYVVB5YE0@i_mtaout3.012.net.il>; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:02:00 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:02:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: RFA: mark -enable-pretty-printing as experimental (Was: Patch: implement new dynamic varobj spec) In-reply-to: To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83d45owoyq.fsf@gnu.org> References: 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/msg00584.txt.bz2 > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:35:00 +0400 > > > + This feature is currently experimental, and may work differently in > > + future versions of @value{GDBN}. > > + > > @subheading The @code{-var-create} Command > > @findex -var-create > > This looks fine to me. Eli? I already replied yesterday, but somehow my mail doesn't show in the list archives, and neither you nor Tom seem to have received it. Strange. Here it is again, from my SENT-MAIL archive: > From: Tom Tromey > Cc: gdb-patches@redhat.com > Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:03:25 -0600 > > + This feature is currently experimental, and may work differently in > + future versions of @value{GDBN}. I suggest to qualify this by telling when is ``currently''. Something like "(as of GDB 7.0)" would do.