Re: [RFA] 12843

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

Keith> I can play with that a little further. I'll also take the time to add
Keith> a bunch of tests to highlight some of the problems. There is an open
Keith> PR about this, to. In general the use of ':' or "::" in filenames is
Keith> really bad for linespecs.

My view is that, aside from the drive-letter case, we should require
funny file names to be quoted.  That is:

Valid:    break 'file with spaces.c':73
Invalid:  break file with spaces.c:73

Valid:    break 'file:with:colons.c':73
Invalid:  break file:with:colons.c:73

Valid either way:
          break c:/file.c:73
          break 'c:/file.c':73

I am not sure how to handle file names with quotes; IIUC typical
escaping syntax won't work because it is already used in DOS-style file
names.  This matters since I think MI clients already have to play funny
games here :-(

(I'd like -break-insert to avoid linespecs completely, which would be a
big improvement IMO, but of course we still have to worry about
compatibility.)


Furthermore I think that quoted text should always be a token: we should
not try to extend the token boundaries or break the token up.  That is:

Valid:    break 'file.c':function
Invalid:  break 'file.c:function'
Invalid:  break 'file'.c:function


I think adopting these rules will make some of my ambiguous linespec
changes simpler.  Also I think they are reasonably faithful to user
expectation; not sure about compatibility, especially for the first rule
-- also note that quoting isn't actually documented :-(

Also, on irc Keith pointed out PR 12706, which this would fix.

Tom