From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24323 invoked by alias); 7 Feb 2013 01:18:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 24262 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Feb 2013 01:18:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.5 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-ea0-f173.google.com (HELO mail-ea0-f173.google.com) (209.85.215.173) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Feb 2013 01:17:49 +0000 Received: by mail-ea0-f173.google.com with SMTP id i1so942094eaa.32 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:17:48 -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:content-transfer-encoding :x-gm-message-state; bh=8WHzZBL2rdsMVrx7uShO/g5ewmweDgbeW+/drW+wlDk=; b=Ii4tWyMAJWQ/1AQ+SWtvZ6bajXCJe/QzotPcyrucON6Ru30tyz7SODYussm/ov5CNE lR+lo+X6O9NLqbDo9M6jdxdWpgsMeC/W+3wv1WkyObh9ubaX4V3NtCJw+JcWlU/r3zGJ UnmpvMEH2s0yxMD3KsiQcgP99SfDrq1+v7sNQrVYYPC1IxGV2OREOSiINoQ0FMDxgfVy bfQl+z3CCeOMtz/525iAtzKOI++evlGDmMI8eD6Vz6FZaBu7WgXELwTceM+KobOapRne kdjV/jWB/nW7IvZIHwPzJWdIrbnTuTKFo5gjXGMMH4OpZ56wkLdecJFOM+xPQCM1L424 gXWA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.14.5.12 with SMTP id 12mr46007552eek.36.1360199868270; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:17:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.14.100.200 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:17:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20130206235707.GA2353@klara.mpi.htwm.de> References: <87y5f1w6xc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130206235707.GA2353@klara.mpi.htwm.de> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 01:18:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC - Python Scripting] New method gdb.Architecture.disassemble From: Siva Chandra To: =?ISO-8859-1?B?QW5kcukgUPZuaXR6?= Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnssNiwykj1oAXObTlRbic5AooPC2mEoWx5xKX/C5bp+yWIRwMzgImP7EyMJisx0TeFK1H1YDHJsD5qhTjFyBQ4xlSGMQgkdajM1ohhlTJDsAjKYVVeA8S0AUNYuid+nhVebJDqqNymMyc1WokiWl9zFjbM593EtOr8u3fOHjslyEU3n+svscSVgVc1AMNr1N8ooIo1Tx7NiLREFoRGx5R2DIvYww== 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00173.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Andr=E9 P=F6nitz wrote: >> 1. [1, 2, 3] >> 2. ['a' : 1, 'b': 2, 'c': 3] >> 3. ['a': 1, 'a': 2, 'a': 3] >> >> 1 and 2 can be encapsulated with fundamental Python data structures. I >> am not aware of any fundamental Python data structure which can >> capture 3. > > Are you asking whether you need to create 3. or whether you need to > be able to read it? > > I think _producing_ 3. is never really needed from a consumers point > of view, but happens more or less accidentally for historic reason. > So the consumer has to be aware of the possibility of it appearing > but generally handles it similarly to 1. > > New commands on the producer side could restrict themselves to not > producing 3, i.e. to use "normal" Python structures only. Python ui_out is a way to get what a "producer" produces into Python. Hence, as Matt and Tom say, we want to be able to entertain as large a set of producers as possible. At least, that is what I understand from their comments.