From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29364 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2010 06:28:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 29344 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jun 2010 06:28:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.44.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 06:28:13 +0000 Received: from wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.88]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o536SBIK021627 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:28:11 -0700 Received: from pwj3 (pwj3.prod.google.com [10.241.219.67]) by wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o536SACG007757 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:28:10 -0700 Received: by pwj3 with SMTP id 3so474425pwj.18 for ; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 23:28:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.141.188.34 with SMTP id q34mr7709751rvp.203.1275546489818; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 23:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.124.10 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:28:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100603001115.GJ3019@adacore.com> References: <1274918921-23200-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <1274918921-23200-3-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <20100603001115.GJ3019@adacore.com> Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 06:28:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFA/python:2/2] First script in GDB python library - command/pahole.py From: Doug Evans To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true 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: 2010-06/txt/msg00093.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > (Doug asked whether we wanted the .py extension or not; either of us > don't seem to have a strong opinion on it, although I do like it, and > most editors will likely also appreciate having it to automatically > activate the python edit mode). For reference sake, I was asking whether we needed command files for the prefixes, not whether the files should have a .py suffix. i.e. instead of having .py files for each prefix and subprefix, in addition to one for the command, as in $dir/commands/prefix.py $dir/commands/prefix/subprefix.py $dir/commands/prefix/subprefix/my-command.py just have $dir/commands/prefix/subprefix/my-command.py I like the consistency of the former, but I'm not sure what to do about prefixes that already exist, e.g. enable, disable. Or what to do if there are multiple command directories and several have commands with the same prefix. btw, Prescanning the directories and creating stubs sounds reasonable. How much of a stub though? In addition to command completion there is help and apropos.