From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id nkRNBuN5pmDqXAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 11:01:55 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0BAE91F11C; Thu, 20 May 2021 11:01:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 648971E54D for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 11:01:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19F2C38515EB; Thu, 20 May 2021 15:01:54 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 19F2C38515EB DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1621522914; bh=DbCjzZ2CZjWRK2SHlzad4tDNxlmiI6Q6+Sd911wKvsQ=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=NEAVHkWTs8WuTbPBP9LWHrymGfNuZmUQXmXNLbzTSug2j1jlqzwLKQNmTSpoLBWmD 9NJ7UOMNInWY2rUJ7j49H4ahuy/hj5pHPSbubkj9Et1GVNuvsgXYDphAjIDK2rqbd+ c+45aWQ2qEKE2px1+3GTU9nO99SzxsxLIZhM1+To= Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B81B038515EB for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 15:01:51 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org B81B038515EB Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 14KF1duV001343 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 20 May 2021 11:01:43 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 14KF1duV001343 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (192-222-157-6.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.157.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B3841E54D; Thu, 20 May 2021 11:01:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [RFC][gdb/cli] Ignore error in gdb command script To: Philippe Waroquiers , Tom de Vries , Tom Tromey , Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches References: <20210518095958.GA22771@delia> <44B64C9E-9E19-47BD-80CD-0C660C7A9D94@undo.io> <453ffcaa-2a21-62a7-d449-28c7c187231a@polymtl.ca> <87im3g14ss.fsf@tromey.com> <767cfa6e293d63526275fe614bb6afa108a662b7.camel@skynet.be> <0ad1098c-3a3a-6f49-6f46-811b0260cf1e@suse.de> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 11:01:38 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Thu, 20 May 2021 15:01:39 +0000 X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2021-05-20 4:02 a.m., Philippe Waroquiers via Gdb-patches wrote: > Not too sure to understand what is meant by 'follow-up' patch as the approaches > are not really aligned: implementing the 'setting approach' later will then add > a different way rather than extend this one. > > For what concerns the naming of the ignore-errors command (discussed in another mail > e.g. as it it makes 'ignore' abbreviations ambiguous): it is worth > mentioning that 'thread apply' and 'frame apply' have -c and -s > arguments to indicate respectively 'print any error and continue' > and 'silently ignore any error'. > > So, maybe the naming of the new setting could be > set error-handling [abort-execution|print-and-continue|silently-ignore] > (default value abort-execution). > > If the 'setting approach' is not the initial absolutely to do preferred approach :), > then the command could be: > error-handle [-a|-c|-s] [--] COMMAND > (with -c being the default if no flag specified). I agree that we should choose whether we want a command or a setting, but not add two things to do the same thing. And I think Philippe has a good point about the naming (that applies to both if it's a command or a setting) to ensure extensibility. Simon