From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31508 invoked by alias); 19 Jul 2011 10:55:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 31452 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Jul 2011 10:55:26 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 10:55:12 +0000 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qj7xH-0005Fx-71; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 06:55:11 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:14:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Jan Kratochvil CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20110718202410.GL30496@host1.jankratochvil.net> (message from Jan Kratochvil on Mon, 18 Jul 2011 22:24:10 +0200) Subject: Re: [RFC 11/12] entryval: "@entry" in input expressions Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20110718202410.GL30496@host1.jankratochvil.net> 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: 2011-07/txt/msg00456.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 22:24:10 +0200 > From: Jan Kratochvil > > it would be good if one can also: > (gdb) print refparam@entry > $1 = 5 > > I am not sure if the entry values should be really indicated by the @entry > suffix. Also as @entry values are not not_lval it may be enough to display > them either by `bt full' and `info args' or even by some new command: > (gdb) entryval param > #1 = 5 Again, why not just (gdb) print refparam ? > +If you append @code{@@entry} string to a function parameter name you get its ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This should be @kbd{@@entry}, since it's something the user should type at the keyboard. > Entry values are available only since @value{NGCC} > +version 4.7. Suggest not to talk about GCC explicitly, but about something more vague, like "only with some compilers". You yourself said in this thread that Ubuntu back-ported the patch to GCC 4.6.x, so saying "since 4.7" would be misleading. > +Breakpoint 1, d (i=30) at gdb.base/entry-value.c:29 > +29 i++; > +(gdb) next > +30 e (i); > +(gdb) print i > +$1 = 31 > +(gdb) print i@@entry > +$2 = 30 Which doesn't add any information beyond what is already shown in the first line. What's the point? Thanks.