From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18164 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2011 16:39:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 18011 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Nov 2011 16:39:46 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_BJ 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; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:39:33 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pAGGdWg8008521 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 16 Nov 2011 11:39:32 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pAGGdV7N021938; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 11:39:32 -0500 Received: from barimba (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 pAGGdUjw007009; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 11:39:30 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Doug Evans Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: implement ambiguous linespec proposal References: <20111028221459.GA28467@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20111104074543.GA13839@host1.jankratochvil.net> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:39:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Doug Evans's message of "Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:31:46 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2011-11/txt/msg00435.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Doug" == Doug Evans writes: Doug> It's not clear that the result of this is that we can programmatically Doug> determine if a file name is present without having to go see if it's Doug> present in the debug info. Doug> Did you have something in mind? Yeah, I don't think that is possible. I think all you can do without digging around is perhaps split the linespec into tokens. Otherwise you have to deal with cases like "FUNCTION:LABEL" differently; and proposed syntax like an optional "OBJFILE:" prefix no longer makes sense. If you are looking for some kind of precision in specifying linespecs, I think implementing an argument form would be more fruitful: break -objfile O -file F.c -function F Then one can write exactly what one means in the situations that require it. Tom