Re: [patch/doc] Tweak "info inferiors" output.

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:37:27 +0100
> 
> Before
> I change that, if we were to add column headers to "info threads", what
> would we call it's second column?  This is really the same thing
> applied to inferiors.

Let me turn the table around and ask you how about if we remove the
column headers from "info inferiors" display, like with "info
threads"?

> Here's what the docs say when describing "info threads":
> 
> @item
> the target system's thread identifier (@var{systag})
> @end enumerate

I can live with that.

> > For processes, I'd prefer "process (PID NNN)".  
> 
> Hmm, not sure.  The data in parentheses looks like
> something that isn't mandatory to be displayed, just
> something extra when there's row space for it.  But, just "process"
> doesn't make sense here.

We use something similar to my suggestion when we report the LWP
thread IDs.  But I see now that we use "process NNN" in "info
threads", so I guess there are precedents and we can go with your
original suggestion, although I can't say I like this form.

> What do you think of this one?

It's fine, thanks.

> We just need to settle on the column name, I think.

Or lack thereof ;-)

> +An asterisk @samp{*} to the left of the @value{GDBN} inferior number

That's really a nit, but if we ever get GDB speak other languages,
that ``to the left of'' will be incorrect with some languages.  Maybe
``preceding the @value{GDBN} inferior number'' is better.