From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3547 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2008 20:03:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 3536 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jun 2008 20:03:30 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:03:13 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m55K3BLM021472 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:03:11 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m55K3B9t013193; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:03:11 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-10-81.bos.redhat.com [10.16.10.81]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m55K3AqR011672; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:03:11 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 3B7AF37819B; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 14:03:10 -0600 (MDT) To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Patch to limit field name completion candidates References: <20080605170952.GJ29085@caradoc.them.org> <20080605194553.GG25085@caradoc.them.org> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: Tom Tromey X-Attribution: Tom Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:03:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20080605194553.GG25085@caradoc.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Thu\, 5 Jun 2008 15\:45\:53 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00067.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz writes: >> We aren't parsing complete expressions, true, but I think by the time >> the COMPLETE token is reduced, we will have reduced the entire LHS of >> the struct op expression. And, we throw away the rest of the >> expression -- all the malformed parts. >> >> So, I think it ought to be safe in all cases. Daniel> Safe, yes. That's not the failure mode I was worried about. I'm Daniel> wondering if we will ever error out before we reduce the COMPLETE. Daniel> But it seems to work so far. In that case, nothing will call mark_struct_expression, and so the completion machinery will not attempt field name completion. Daniel> Another example near the bottom of Command Completion would probably Daniel> do it. Ok. I will add this. Tom