From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10596 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2011 13:39:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 10585 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Mar 2011 13:39:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il (HELO mtaout20.012.net.il) (80.179.55.166) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 13:39:49 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LHS00200L8ONY00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:39:27 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.58.59]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LHS001BILXPE3C0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:39:26 +0200 (IST) Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:01:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [patch] Add support for hooking prefix commands In-reply-to: <4D777894.5040204@gmail.com> To: Sorin Otescu Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83k4g8pg4x.fsf@gnu.org> References: <4D776143.4000200@gmail.com> <83oc5kpivg.fsf@gnu.org> <4D777894.5040204@gmail.com> 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: 2011-03/txt/msg00596.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:54:44 +0200 > From: Sorin Otescu > CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > Can we have underscore characters in commands? If so, this > > implementation would defeat hooking them. > > > It is possible to define commands containing underscores, but none of > the built-in commands > contain any (they all use dash). That could be a problem. What do others think? > > Anyway, if this is accepted, please write a short patch for the manual > > as well. > > > The documentation for 7.2 suggests this functionality is already there; > the difference is that > you need to hook the last word of the command (in this case, > hook-threads). I wonder if > that's enough / better... This patch was generated from 7.0 and adapted > to 7.2. Are you saying that 7.2 already supports this feature? Or are you saying that it's documented there, but doesn't work?