Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: RFC: Clean up "show remote"
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:38:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <u64obpnhu.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060122201759.GA28863@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel 	Jacobowitz on Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:17:59 -0500)

> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:17:59 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> Does anyone have an opinion on this patch?  It's, um, a bit inelegant;
> but it removes the hardcoded list of subcommands in show_remote_cmd, which
> happens to be missing two.  I always try "show remote" when I want to
> remember the spelling of "set remote hardware-breakpoint-limit", but
> it didn't include that.

This patch is fine with me, in general.

> Also shorten the messages a bit by removing redundancy; either the user
> typed config->title, or it was prefixed to the output already.

I'm not quite sure I get this.  With the current code, "show remote"
outputs lines like this:

 Support for remote protocol `Z0' (software-breakpoint) packet is auto-detected,
 currently unknown.

With your change, the part in parentheses will not be displayed, so
how would the user know that Z0 is a packet that sets software
breakpoints?

> An alternative if the code in show_remote_cmd is too ugly would be to delete
> "show remote Z-packet".  I think we have to leave "set remote Z-packet" -
> it's five years obsoleted but never marked as deprecated and I know people
> are continuing to use it - but the show command is completely redundant.

I think what you did is fine, but perhaps explain a bit more in
comments about why Z-packet is redundant, and that maybe it should be
removed later on.


  reply	other threads:[~2006-01-23  4:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-22 20:18 Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-01-23  4:38 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2006-01-23  5:15   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-01-23 22:44     ` Eli Zaretskii
2006-01-24 16:53       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-01-24 21:24         ` Eli Zaretskii
2006-01-24 21:28         ` Eli Zaretskii
2006-01-24 21:49           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-01-24 22:10             ` Eli Zaretskii
2006-01-24 22:18               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-02-02  2:07     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-01-23 23:01 ` Jim Blandy
2006-01-23 23:24   ` Daniel Jacobowitz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=u64obpnhu.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox