From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 106464 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2017 13:33:25 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 105411 invoked by uid 89); 2 Jun 2017 13:33:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mail-wm0-f48.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f48.google.com) (74.125.82.48) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 13:33:22 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f48.google.com with SMTP id 7so25884088wmo.1 for ; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 06:33:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=LTkwfOwMwoy4r75M+lAl2LczeQqK64mT7BpmcgbG6ng=; b=cdL74j71zTjMvUuVtqzYYsXQ4BNv0ICxcJFfuVuBkrAZ0ISWZwHYzcqycwvJJ51ics M9Atz6eTr+BfxeVYcgZBfr7j6/KqQKInfwBAx/y+WO7f4d0QrWrtEPJ3pc20tFz4LoC5 v1j0uvBts+yyX8Rt3FS3fnM5VfrOgLang//ETRdXXeh1XatBp2efH5CE60tfRhdpD/+4 AaC2b5Jjq/k2YAml+Wi4Ko0kH/U3bEvxuFmTEcKp1QOcvjyyCPVtGrEHtn4IYwSK1rza nJk4UUuWhlBrDJLkK2BpwMAo6sn0Q6ir+yVCQ3lYF9UAeykDFyq7HzeodRN7izbHCGql Z/sw== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBbSsdK/XTuVsXSbtT1k8NPUSyeEjzQjvf44oGA6ZqSOq9CkECu ZGj9T05PEY7xKIdxwgSGxg== X-Received: by 10.28.165.80 with SMTP id o77mr3149142wme.109.1496410404590; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 06:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.102] ([37.189.166.198]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o97sm23996694wrc.48.2017.06.02.06.33.23 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 02 Jun 2017 06:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 40/40] Document breakpoints / linespec & co improvements (manual + NEWS) To: Eli Zaretskii References: <1496406158-12663-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1496406158-12663-41-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <83a85qczmo.fsf@gnu.org> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 13:33:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83a85qczmo.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg00049.txt.bz2 On 06/02/2017 02:01 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Pedro Alves >> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 13:22:38 +0100 >> >> +For example, assuming a program with symbols named @code{A::B::func} >> +and @code{B::func}, both commands @code{break -function func} and >> +@code{break -function B::func} set a breakpoint on both symbols. > > The 2 commands are long and include whitespace, so I'd suggest > enclosing each one in @w{..}, to avoid a line break in the middle of a > command. > > Also, I think @kbd is more appropriate here than @code, since you mean > commands the user will type, not just command names. > > I'm surprised you didn't change anything where the manual discusses > quoting of names and symbols. For example, the node "Completion" > explicitly describes a use case with overloaded functions in C++; the > node "Symbols" describes a case with "::" that requires quoting. > There's another example in "Machine Code", and also in "Ambiguous > Expression", and in "Variables". Maybe you already reviewed all of > those and concluded no changes were necessary, but I just thought I'd > mention them. Thanks, I just didn't think of looking for quoting bits in the manual, for some reason. I'll take a closer look. > >> + ** GDB now has a much improved linespec and explicit locations TAB >> + completion support, that better understands what you're >> + completing and offers better suggestions. > > Is this a general improvement, or is it limited to C++ symbols? If > the latter, suggest to mention that. You're right. It's more general than C++. > >> + ** GDB can now complete function parameters in linespecs and >> + explicit locations, even without quoting. When setting >> + breakpoints, quoting around functions names to help with >> + TAB-completion is generally no longer necessary. > > Likewise. > >> + ** GDB can now set breakpoints functions marked with [abi:cxx11] >> + tags. > > "on functions", I think. > > And btw, what are those tags? This is the best document that I know describing them: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2015/02/05/gcc5-and-the-c11-abi/ Functions that ended up requiring an abi tag are demangled like this: string_printf[abi:cxx11](char const*, ...) ^^^^^^^^^^^ That's an actual function in GDB. It ended requiring an ABI tag because it returns std::string. See intro of patch 39 for more. > I don't think I see them documented in the manual; did I miss something? Hmm, I guess we could add something, indeed. Thanks, Pedro Alves