[rfc] s/ui_out_list/ui_out_tupple/

[rfc] s/ui_out_list/ui_out_tupple/

[Andrew Cagney]

Hello,

The attatched patch is a deliberate step sideways for the UI/MI code.

At present, the UI code uses ui_out_list*() to create the output while 
the MI code outputs tupples. The attatched, patch changes the UI code so 
that it it creates tupples instead of lists making the UI and MI 
consistent. To ease my pain, I added ui_out_tupple*() wrappers.

By taking a step sideways, I've removed the need to review/update 
individual MI commands in a single hit. Instead it can be done 
incrementally.

Andrew
From fnasser@redhat.com Fri May 11 11:40:00 2001
From: Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@cygnus.com>
Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>, Jim Blandy <jimb@cygnus.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Keith Seitz <keiths@cygnus.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFA] breakpoint.c: Pass breakpoint type to set_raw_breakpoint()
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 11:40:00 -0000
Message-id: <3AFC317A.5A4A3D49@redhat.com>
References: <1010511075057.ZM27226@ocotillo.lan> <3AFC1ED7.9458AEE1@cygnus.com> <3AFC2113.5A85D353@redhat.com> <1010511183521.ZM28626@ocotillo.lan>
X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00232.html
Content-length: 1831

Kevin Buettner wrote:
> 
> On May 11,  1:27pm, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> 
> > > Kevin, I like it, but I noticed that set_raw_breakpoint is not static.
> > > It was made extern in 1998, and is used by gdbtk-cmds.c.
> > >
> > > Can you check to see if that call needs a bp_type argument, and if that
> > > call can't be eliminated, maybe you should add a prototype to breakpoint.h.
> >
> > I believe it can be made static now.  I don't think anyone should be
> > using it outside breakpoint.c.
> >
> > Keith, does your new gdbtk-bp.c uses this function?
> 
> Does Keith have a version that's not checked in yet?
> 
> I did an update a moment ago and notice that set_raw_breakpoint is
> still used by gdbtk-bp.c.  Here's a telling comment from this file...
> 
>     /*
>      * These are routines we need from breakpoint.c.
>      * at some point make these static in breakpoint.c and move GUI code there
>      */
> 
>     extern struct breakpoint *set_raw_breakpoint (struct symtab_and_line sal);
>     extern void set_breakpoint_count (int);
>     extern int breakpoint_count;
> 
> I will adjust the set_raw_breakpoint() calls in gdbtk-bp.c to pass the
> extra argument.  I'll let Keith (or someone else more familiar with
> these issues than I am) decide whether a prototype ought to be added
> to breakpoint.h or if the calls in gdbtk-bp.c can be eliminated (thus
> allowing breakpoint.c to make set_raw_breakpoint() static again).
> 

Fair enough.

Thanks.

P.S.: Thank you Michael Snyder, for the heads up.  My SourceNav got the
reduced gdbtk-cmds.c where this call was before but I did not yet add
the new files where the call is now, so I was not seeing the call in
gdbtk land.


-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd.                     E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9

Re: [rfc] s/ui_out_list/ui_out_tupple/

[Stan Shebs]

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> The attatched patch is a deliberate step sideways for the UI/MI code.
> 
> At present, the UI code uses ui_out_list*() to create the output while
> the MI code outputs tupples. The attatched, patch changes the UI code so
> that it it creates tupples instead of lists making the UI and MI
> consistent. To ease my pain, I added ui_out_tupple*() wrappers.

So, is "tupple", like, Australian for "tuple" or something? :-)

(Just for fun, I did a Google search for "tupple" - only appears a
few hundred times, vs 150K+ for "tuple"...)

Stan

Re: [rfc] s/ui_out_list/ui_out_tupple/

[Andrew Cagney]

> Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> The attatched patch is a deliberate step sideways for the UI/MI code.
>> 
>> At present, the UI code uses ui_out_list*() to create the output while
>> the MI code outputs tupples. The attatched, patch changes the UI code so
>> that it it creates tupples instead of lists making the UI and MI
>> consistent. To ease my pain, I added ui_out_tupple*() wrappers.
> 
> 
> So, is "tupple", like, Australian for "tuple" or something? :-)


It is what you get when I try to pronounce tuple with a Canadian accent :-)


> (Just for fun, I did a Google search for "tupple" - only appears a
> few hundred times, vs 150K+ for "tuple"...)


They are probably all mine as well :-)  I'll fix that.

	Andrew

Re: [rfc] s/ui_out_list/ui_out_tupple/

[Eli Zaretskii]

On Fri, 11 May 2001, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> At present, the UI code uses ui_out_list*() to create the output while 
> the MI code outputs tupples. The attatched, patch changes the UI code so 
> that it it creates tupples instead of lists making the UI and MI 
> consistent. To ease my pain, I added ui_out_tupple*() wrappers.

IIRC many of the uses of ui_out_list* in breakpoint.c are used as
examples in gdbint.texinfo chapter which describes ui_out.  If the
current say-so is to use ui_out_tupple* isntead, I think those
examples should be brought in sync with the party line.

Re: [rfc] s/ui_out_list/ui_out_tupple/

[Andrew Cagney]

> IIRC many of the uses of ui_out_list* in breakpoint.c are used as
> examples in gdbint.texinfo chapter which describes ui_out.  If the
> current say-so is to use ui_out_tupple* isntead, I think those
> examples should be brought in sync with the party line.


Right now there isn't a current say-so.  Fixing it so that there is and 
making all consistent again is my next step in this process.

	Andrew