From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 549 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2009 21:37:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 540 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2009 21:37:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BARRACUDA_BRBL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:37:39 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LZXdJ-0007mF-HY for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:37:37 +0000 Received: from h86-62-88-129.ln.rinet.ru ([86.62.88.129]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:37:37 +0000 Received: from vladimir by h86-62-88-129.ln.rinet.ru with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:37:37 +0000 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Vladimir Prus Subject: Re: MI solib notification Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:45:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <200901310010.46738.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200902172208.37427.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200902172244.48437.vladimir@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit User-Agent: KNode/0.10.9 X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-02/txt/msg00368.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Vladimir Prus >> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 22:44:48 +0300 >> Cc: drow@false.org, >> gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, >> nickrob@snap.net.nz >> >> How about the attached, instead? >> [...] >> +@item =library-loaded,... >> +Reports that a new library file was loaded by the program. This >> +notification has 4 fields---@var{id}, @var{target-name}, >> +@var{host-name}, and @var{symbols-loaded}. The @var{id} field is an >> +opaque identifier of the library. For remote debugging case, >> +@var{target-name} and @var{host-name} fields give the name of the >> +library file on the target, and on the host respectively. For native >> +debugging, both those fields have the same value. The >> +@var{symbols-loaded} field reports if the debug symbols for this >> +library are loaded. > > That's okay, but now I ask again why not do it like I suggested in the > first place, viz.: > > @item =library-loaded,@var{info} > Reports that a new library file was loaded by the program. @var{info} > includes 4 fields: > > @table @code > @item id="@var{id}" > Opaque identifier of the library. > @item target-name="@var{target-name}" > @itemx host-name="@var{host-name}" > For remote debugging case, @var{target-name} and @var{host-name} > fields give the name of the library file on the target, and on the > host respectively. For native debugging, both those fields have the > same value. > ... > > etc., you get the idea. What you suggested now is very close to this, > but I think my suggestion makes it easier to read and grasp. I think the way you suggest is more complex. It introduces a new symbol 'info' that does not actually correspond to standalone entity in MI output and users might begin to wonder what info actually is, and how it includes fields. Saying that notification itself has 4 fields is more direct. - Volodya