From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 41615 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2018 17:11:34 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 41138 invoked by uid 89); 25 Mar 2018 17:11:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*r:2001 X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (208.118.235.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:11:32 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f09B0-0001er-Me for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2018 13:11:30 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42721) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f09B0-0001el-Ip; Sun, 25 Mar 2018 13:11:26 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1973 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1f09B0-0001r2-3U; Sun, 25 Mar 2018 13:11:26 -0400 Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:11:00 -0000 Message-Id: <83y3igf5bu.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <87lgegaykz.fsf@tromey.com> (message from Tom Tromey on Sun, 25 Mar 2018 10:50:52 -0600) Subject: Re: [RFA v3 01/13] Rationalize "backtrace" command line parsing Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20180323205512.14434-1-tom@tromey.com> <20180323205512.14434-2-tom@tromey.com> <83tvt6gf1j.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgegaykz.fsf@tromey.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-03/txt/msg00502.txt.bz2 > From: Tom Tromey > Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2018 10:50:52 -0600 > > >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: > > Eli> Is it wise to delete the @table? We always describe commands in that > Eli> format, AFAIR. > > The patch actually just moves the table down a bit and removes some text > from each entry. It isn't really deleted. For example: > > -@item backtrace @var{n} > -@itemx bt @var{n} > -Similar, but print only the innermost @var{n} frames. > > becomes > > +@table @code > +@item @var{n} > +@itemx @var{n} > +Print only the innermost @var{n} frames, where @var{n} is a positive > +number. Yes, but the original table included the command, as we do with all commands, whereas your new table includes only the various forms of arguments to the command, and the command itself is never mentioned, except in the surrounding text. > What here would you like changed? I expected to see something like this, before the description of arguments: @table @code @item backtrace [@var{args}@dots{}] @itemx bt [@var{args}@dots{}] Print the backtrace of the entire stack. The optional @var{args} can be one of the following: followed by your table of arguments. Thanks.