Re: [RFA] 12843

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:07:34 -0600
> 
> My view is that, aside from the drive-letter case, we should require
> funny file names to be quoted.

Agreed.

> I am not sure how to handle file names with quotes; IIUC typical
> escaping syntax won't work because it is already used in DOS-style file
> names.  This matters since I think MI clients already have to play funny
> games here :-(

Can we standardize on quoting with ".." instead?  If so, DOS file
names will not be a problem, because DOS/Windows filesystems don't
allow the `"' character in file names.  Therefore, \" can be safely
interpreted as a literal double quote character.

If we must use '..' style quoting, then how about doubling the ' to
express a literal quote character?

> Furthermore I think that quoted text should always be a token: we should
> not try to extend the token boundaries or break the token up.  That is:
> 
> Valid:    break 'file.c':function
> Invalid:  break 'file.c:function'
> Invalid:  break 'file'.c:function

What about these:

 break 'file with spaces.c:function:with:colons'
 break 'file with spaces.c':'function:with:colons'

?  Do you propose just the latter to be valid?