Re: Python pretty-printing [5/6]

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 19:07:52 -0600
> 
> Here is the new version of this patch.
> 
> I think I have addressed all the comments; either by making the
> requested change or explaining why I did not.  Still, you probably
> should check.

Thanks.  I have 2 minor comments:

> +We recommend that you put your core pretty-printers into a Python
> +package.  If your pretty-printers are for use with a library, we
> +further recommend embedding a version number into the package name.
> +This practice will enable @value{GDBN} to load multiple versions of
> +your pretty-printers at the same time.

I couldn't quite understand the importance of the version numbers, and
how that would allow GDB to have multiple versions of the same
pretty-printer.  I asked myself how the ``right'' version will be
selected in that case.  Is the way this works documented somewhere
else? if so, a cross-reference here would be good.  If not, I think we
need to say a few words about that.

> +You should write auto-loaded code such that it can be evaluated
> +multiple times without changing its meaning.

Here, I suggest a cross-reference to where auto-loading is described.

Otherwise, this patch for the manual is fine with me.