Re: [PATCH] gdb: Introduce user-friendly namespace identifier for "info shared"

[Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca>]

On 3/17/25 7:55 AM, Guinevere Larsen wrote:
> I can give this a shot, but in my head there are 2 ways of implementing it:
> 
> 1. If there is more than one linker namespace *active* when the command is run;
> 2. If there is more than one linker namespace *registered* when the command is run;
> 
> The main difference is: if the inferior has opened an SO in a namespace, but has since closed it and everything loaded is in the default namespace, should we still have the NS column? The first is closer to a future plan of having an "active namespaces" convenience variable, while the second is brand new code that I don't expect to use anywhere else, but I can see an argument for it, so which do you prefer?

I don't know much about linker namespaces, so I don't know which option
is better, but I agree that not showing the column when the program
doesn't deal with non-default namespaces would be nice.  We do something
similar for instance with info threads: if there is a single inferior,
we don't show the inferior number in the thread id, otherwise we do.

Simon