From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15969 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2009 17:35:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 15960 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Oct 2009 17:35:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,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; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:35:16 +0000 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n99HZCQd021313; Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:35:12 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n99HZBsY026837; Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:35:11 -0400 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 n99HZ9c9023025; Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:35:10 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 925FD378212; Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:35:09 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: dje@google.com (Doug Evans) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Make "directories" a variable References: <20091006021038.70688843AC@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:35:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20091006021038.70688843AC@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> (Doug Evans's message of "Mon, 5 Oct 2009 19:10:38 -0700 (PDT)") 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00193.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Doug" == Doug Evans writes: Doug> I like the addition of "set directories mumble", but that's just me, Doug> and I know better than to be wedded to it. :-) This part is totally fine by me. I can't imagine ever actually using it -- but that is true for any number of already existing parameters :) Doug> Tom suggested in IRC returning a list in python. Doug> I don't have a strong opinion on that either, Doug> it's trivial for the user to work with either form. There are three reasons I think a python list is better. 1. It conforms more nicely to Python programmer expectations and is simply a better API. This really is a list. 2. Most uses of this parameter will want to use the list form, not the string form. 3. If it is a string, then most users will have to write Python code to unpack and interpret it. This is bad because some list elements require special treatment, the string is formatted differently on different hosts, etc. Tom