From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-42826-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 14906 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2006 19:08:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 14894 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Feb 2006 19:08:30 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from romy.inter.net.il (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:08:29 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-42-78.inter.net.il [80.230.42.78]) 	by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) 	with ESMTP id DNW60084 (AUTH halo1); 	Sat, 11 Feb 2006 21:08:10 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:08:00 -0000
Message-Id: <u4q35yaqt.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Fred Fish <fnf@specifix.com>, Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20060211183500.GA25132@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel 	Jacobowitz on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:35:00 -0500)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ptype problem printing typedefs defined differently in different compilation units
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <200601031517.50309.fnf@specifix.com> <200601231435.47790.fnf@specifix.com> <8f2776cb0601231245y6bc1e8a4yc80070284575e654@mail.gmail.com> <200602101935.06700.fnf@specifix.com> <20060211183500.GA25132@nevyn.them.org>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00264.txt.bz2

> Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:35:00 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> The documentation for whatis and ptype leaves me way unenlightened
> about what the difference between them is supposed to be; perhaps we
> should eliminate the difference.

Is the following excerpt from the manual incorrect?  If it's correct,
it seems to answer your question:

    @item ptype @var{expr}
    @itemx ptype
    Print a description of the type of expression @var{expr}.  @code{ptype}
    differs from @code{whatis} by printing a detailed description, instead
    of just the name of the type.

    For example, for this variable declaration:

    @smallexample
    struct complex @{double real; double imag;@} v;
    @end smallexample

    @noindent
    the two commands give this output:

    @smallexample
    @group
    (@value{GDBP}) whatis v
    type = struct complex
    (@value{GDBP}) ptype v
    type = struct complex @{
	double real;
	double imag;
    @}
    @end group
    @end smallexample