From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25522 invoked by alias); 21 May 2002 16:14:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25492 invoked from network); 21 May 2002 16:14:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 May 2002 16:14:17 -0000 Received: from makita.cygnus.com (makita.sfbay.redhat.com [192.168.30.83]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01813; Tue, 21 May 2002 09:11:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (keiths@localhost) by makita.cygnus.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.6.4) with ESMTP id JAA22381; Tue, 21 May 2002 09:11:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: makita.cygnus.com: keiths owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 09:14:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz X-X-Sender: To: Eli Zaretskii cc: Subject: Re: [RFC] GDB interpreters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00836.txt.bz2 On Tue, 21 May 2002, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > However, it sounds, at least for the commands you included in this > patch, like they should be documented in gdb.texinfo, not in the MI part, > since they are not parts of the MI. Or did I miss something? Doh! You're right: my brain wasn't fully functional. Let me revise: I will document whatever I remember to document. Someone should scream at me if I miss anything else! :-) > Can we have completion on known interpreter names in these commands? The > default completer function completes on symbols from the inferior, which > is really not a good idea in this case ;-) I can certainly look into that... Keith From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26204 invoked by alias); 21 May 2002 16:16:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25492 invoked from network); 21 May 2002 16:14:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 May 2002 16:14:17 -0000 Received: from makita.cygnus.com (makita.sfbay.redhat.com [192.168.30.83]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01813; Tue, 21 May 2002 09:11:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (keiths@localhost) by makita.cygnus.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.6.4) with ESMTP id JAA22381; Tue, 21 May 2002 09:11:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: makita.cygnus.com: keiths owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 09:23:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz X-X-Sender: To: Eli Zaretskii cc: Subject: Re: [RFC] GDB interpreters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00837.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20020521092300.srhqklWcnJx9Kelz-VJPVpE6rEhhuKVECRgt9jo7XBo@z> On Tue, 21 May 2002, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > However, it sounds, at least for the commands you included in this > patch, like they should be documented in gdb.texinfo, not in the MI part, > since they are not parts of the MI. Or did I miss something? Doh! You're right: my brain wasn't fully functional. Let me revise: I will document whatever I remember to document. Someone should scream at me if I miss anything else! :-) > Can we have completion on known interpreter names in these commands? The > default completer function completes on symbols from the inferior, which > is really not a good idea in this case ;-) I can certainly look into that... Keith