From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Cc: ppluzhnikov@google.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][patch] Allow to disassemble line.
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:16:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <83pr8xlsff.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091008162445.GC11440@adacore.com>
> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:24:45 -0700
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>
> > Does anybody have an opinion on whether the implementation should be
> > changed to match the manual, or vice versa?
>
> My 2 cents: I *think* the intention of this setting was to display
> the next few instructions that are about to be executed. That's the way
> I personally would like this feature to work as I'd be able to identify
> immediately which instruction is next. So my vote goes towards updating
> the manual to match the current implementation.
If the current implementation is what we want (and I personally don't
have an opinion either way), then I don't think the subtle difference
is important enough to update the manual. The described behavior is
what most users will see almost all the time; accurately describing
the subtlety of this when you crash will most probably be so confusing
that it is not worth doing.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-08 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-02 0:50 Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-02 6:52 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-10-02 18:31 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-02 18:49 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-10-02 15:17 ` Tom Tromey
2009-10-08 16:16 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-08 16:23 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-10-08 16:25 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-10-08 16:52 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-08 17:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-10-08 17:33 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-10-16 23:07 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-16 23:11 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-17 8:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-10-17 15:50 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-17 16:49 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-10-17 17:08 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-17 19:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-10-19 17:47 ` Tom Tromey
2009-10-19 18:09 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-19 18:20 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-19 18:30 ` Tom Tromey
2009-10-21 0:22 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-21 4:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-10-21 18:06 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-21 18:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-10-21 17:24 ` Tom Tromey
2009-10-19 18:49 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-10-19 19:40 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-10-19 19:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-10-19 20:03 ` Tom Tromey
2009-10-19 20:10 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-10-19 20:23 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-10-19 20:47 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-10-19 19:40 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-10-19 19:55 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-10-20 16:04 ` Tom Tromey
2009-10-08 16:24 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-10-08 17:16 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=83pr8xlsff.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=ppluzhnikov@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox