Re: [RFA] candidates for ambiguous command in upper case

[Luis Machado <lgustavo@codesourcery.com>]

On 01/17/2017 11:04 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 01/17/2017 04:51 PM, Luis Machado wrote:
>> On 01/17/2017 10:34 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> On 01/17/2017 04:29 PM, Luis Machado wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don't see a problem with #1 as long as we keep it consistent
>>>> throughout from now on.
>>>
>>> Can you expand on exactly what you mean by the "as long" part?
>
>> Meaning that, if we go with #1, we should make sure we are not doing
>> case-insensitive comparisons in gdb unless it is clearly stated we
>> should do it (like handling of Windows paths i suppose).
>
> Would you say that we should stop completing "handle sig" to "handle SIG"?
> "handle" doesn't accept lowercase signal names, but it could be
> argued that the completer is helping the user here.
>

That sounds like a one-off case where it is useful.

> Grepping for strncasecmp doesn't find all that many hits, and several
> are in symbol lookup or path handling stuff where they're probably rightly
> used.
>

I'll go through the code to see if there are any other occurrences.

> The ones in tracepoint.c do look like of the inconsistent-user-interface sort.
> I had never realized we accept $REG etc. in tracepoint actions.
>

Neither did i. This one looks like it could be dropped.