From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2506 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2010 23:48:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 2498 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Feb 2010 23:48:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:48:13 +0000 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o19NmCeG031405 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 18:48:12 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o19NmBO6017694; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 18:48:11 -0500 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o19NmA1s028344; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 18:48:11 -0500 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 20F1137824A; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 16:48:09 -0700 (MST) From: Tom Tromey To: Chris Moller Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: PR11067 patch References: <4B6D70A3.2090208@redhat.com> <4B719BF6.1040207@redhat.com> Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:48:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4B719BF6.1040207@redhat.com> (Chris Moller's message of "Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:31:34 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (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: 2010-02/txt/msg00266.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Chris" == Chris Moller writes: Chris> The argument still applies that, no matter which format(s) are defined Chris> for multifaceted data (in this case, numeric value, symbolic value, Chris> and enum tag), it's not going to meet everyone's needs--the discussion Chris> on this thread demonstrates that fairly well. GDB classically bikesheds over output formatting and command naming, but in my view these are generally disagreement based on aesthetic preference, not needs. In the end someone usually relents, we pick a style, and move on. My reason for not wanting this, aside from lack of any precedent, is based on my belief that the differences are aesthetic and not functional. That leads me to conclude that in this case the cost of another gdb option is outweighed by the triviality of the issue. Chris> It's certainly possible to provide for multiple formats that are Chris> selected based on context--the only thing I don't know just off hand Chris> is how to determine that context. Summary mode is a flag in value_print_options. Other things can, I think, be distinguished by recurse==0. Tom