From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-98558-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 7972 invoked by alias); 15 Feb 2013 18:57:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 7964 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Feb 2013 18:57:55 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.6 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-wi0-f169.google.com) (209.85.212.169)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:57:50 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id l13so1740884wie.0        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 10:57:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=google.com; s=20120113;        h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id         :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state;        bh=qAOK2RvvBmibedMbGVHMJVGhjYdKYZpRAZlpfE63Fzs=;        b=LWPQiPxVwH73YAH8eqR/7J1IfNJ5r0aKY/XTmWB8ja6DxVnSazA/+tJMnIrnAxUIAA         +k52DRWv8yRleiwDaVpq1nw3zqq6HVCpDmhy/bBsP6fehH41DRoRbpUUXmG90hokBIZB         48bTCXxoUl8aG7RzpONmEMd9pFlXh4yCgQJsrrFBTjH1wwo8v76WDtTJr/jhh8AnE9/t         oc+ujl40iuT6OREk2BAdSKhDGRPvPhFhOuonovoup7FDLlL3hz0H4E5+DyZmaOCBFIeK         plb9a+oWRRa4d/l2hVpL52fM0HRT43hmRhR7Dan6RRoa2ZOWVqntOtH6EshhbKhTiLBm         tDLw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.84.162 with SMTP id a2mr6132720wiz.14.1360954669313; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 10:57:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.158.195 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 10:57:49 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAGyQ6gw0aKKNeNND_AAf5ZCDpqsQff_+bib0r63G-gtP2jECkg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGyQ6gy_08hZn2Pk6pmD+AuOkH7SCsQ6732KTa7sucZ7-4prUA@mail.gmail.com>	<20753.38272.55066.651097@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com>	<CAGyQ6gy68LdCd_qxDX7vinMg-Pb6qnukGScOw2uzgezxKxh_TA@mail.gmail.com>	<CADPb22TGJNFg7VJkeoTB7Ctd=K2Tc490LKo_mdUVXFF2K6TV5g@mail.gmail.com>	<CAGyQ6gweW=9L4mVCkFetd+LvvpjSYzYKM78mYDu5HfG1LpVwiQ@mail.gmail.com>	<87txphmdt3.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<CAGyQ6gzSs617BRcreAGA5418EpXaqCaPN8ZzKjQYNx9yxDSJRA@mail.gmail.com>	<87r4kkks5g.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<CAGyQ6gwSnFH3OKHSpNxVmVxRRRM61c=T=euhJg6hyFL7+88ecg@mail.gmail.com>	<20763.64197.459891.627211@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com>	<CAGyQ6gxOqnD0tr+rR2kuYBr6ub6vN8DvGG5PxA+BO-O8VYXVqA@mail.gmail.com>	<20765.55532.700460.792597@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com>	<CADPb22Txs4KJ8oQmCTmFpjoUFOBsannfCnr6ZxY3OWLH7GXxDg@mail.gmail.com>	<CAGyQ6gw0aKKNeNND_AAf5ZCDpqsQff_+bib0r63G-gtP2jECkg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:57:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CADPb22SR_E5JnUCOdV0v5_Ki3cFBdLRUjnLt-S9x0NEuKag4Xw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC - Python Scripting] New method gdb.Architecture.disassemble
From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
To: Siva Chandra <sivachandra@google.com>
Cc: gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>, 	Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlNqRQJIX0A9Hp0hoGUUhCWzZffOGekr9U7werSLcHiFH/7dajHFL5FPyyiA2TYfthkdQZtRmafv0uXpaaFdtMJCCDL4ll4FDQ+SnecpygokhXrjsmNtcFq/mRk/IDS4GtiswT6BpYIapZMOkSvVvo15NxocCii7t+Bk4ZGIUMImp0Twvne/gUdunXVOPejw+aX4FvJ2BC444f+EEXfVIrV7SBZXA==
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2013-02/txt/msg00408.txt.bz2

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Siva Chandra <sivachandra@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Doug Evans <dje@google.com> wrote:
>> Oh, duh.  Sorry for the followup.
>> This needs a NEWS entry.
>
> There is an entry in the NEWS file:
>
> ** New method Frame.architecture returns the gdb.Architecture object
>      corresponding to the frame's architecture.
>
> Adding a new entry for this new method on gdb.Architecture might not
> be good idea?  I can of course modify to say, "...  gdb.Architecture
> object corresponding to the frame's architecture with methods 'name'
> and 'disassemble'.", but it doesn't sound that very nice.

Ah.
I guess whether to add another one for disassemble is debatable then.
Ok with me to leave out the NEWS entry then.