From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30700 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2012 15:20:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 30682 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2012 15:20:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vb0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-vb0-f41.google.com) (209.85.212.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:20:43 +0000 Received: by vbbey12 with SMTP id ey12so1241727vbb.0 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:20:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record :x-gm-message-state; bh=VcfU1Mo4J7y9COCd9Wpx7DXBUi1hOmHTKRpHamOgxsU=; b=HsCIxtVGn4KSBqQi0jPy/NtgD2Q07G6b92e7jNZaAZ7JDXbPWWCBFMeGwYC9tCznz+ AGw9jXux+xw5ziBAjPfpKdAooYB9CXfUmlc2nLPuCoEH78KYpf5OrkKzgIOZHC48eUq/ b/gfP/0TxY0NKAsaBYOhnx0gJjKyFmGqF5CHW3RsURU12e7Qu5llXEc36t3RYFwfU1oE XiMKHgYrC/6RzTE80tINqxsLpcMip0P2zs2N9wdzm5ZPS098lfIzZTQMk1p6yD/GKiLM IX9cUmd88HGuabQb3CYqLMjEa+DYNXcdFcUNs8BP/u7BbtDhgvKY7MWm8QGMJ6Bs3hKA mwjw== Received: by 10.52.180.106 with SMTP id dn10mr6363816vdc.127.1335453643108; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:20:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.180.106 with SMTP id dn10mr6363802vdc.127.1335453642993; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.165.2 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:20:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <831unms3jy.fsf@gnu.org> <4F8F187D.3050402@redhat.com> <878vhsojgd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87sjfyi5rj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87lilmh9jf.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83y5pmft8k.fsf@gnu.org> <4F95630D.1000202@redhat.com> <83vckqfpzb.fsf@gnu.org> <87ehrcco7v.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:21:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC - Python scripting] New methods Symtab.global_block and Symtab.static_block (docs included) From: Doug Evans To: Siva Chandra Cc: Tom Tromey , Eli Zaretskii , Phil Muldoon , ratmice@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQna8hiGdgQ5zs1y6C6FQHM8criXOuEWpBQsPumOHoK2f9bD2rTTHM9IVWwCmktD7kQEV0SLS+nxP9iOdnhOYFF+q8t6PFcoAhSeChw9PLBRSsRM3Jgp+tyZxeaYKT4DJPPf0Tj5QliUBTiCzZhvVsN8KClx2g== 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: 2012-04/txt/msg00918.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Siva Chandra wrot= e: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >> I think the difficulty here is that saying nothing may also lull Python >> users into a false sense of security that we will not change things in >> this area. >> >> But, we'd still like the freedom to change things. =A0For example, we've >> talked off and on about implementing "hierarchical" symbol tables, where >> the symbols in a namespace (e.g.) are kept in the namespace symbol, not >> globally. >> >> If we made this sort of change, then iterating over the block would >> return different results. >> >> Maybe there is some way to rewrite the original text to give us some >> leeway. > > Does this note to user need to be a part of this patch? fwiw, my opinion is "No.". That would just be making you put too much effort into form over substance. If you want to, go for it. But it's not necessary (IMO). We may want to hold off checking things in until the doc text is ready thou= gh.