From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>
Cc: drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [doc] improve MI varobj introduction
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 09:26:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <u8xgh25az.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200701051139.09498.ghost@cs.msu.su> (message from Vladimir Prus on Fri, 5 Jan 2007 11:39:09 +0300)
> From: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>
> Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 11:39:09 +0300
> Cc: drow@false.org,
> gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> > > +Variable object is MI interface to work with expressions.
> >
> > Perhaps it's an interface to work with named expressions, because I
> > believe you don't need anything to work with just expressions, do you?
>
> Although you can use -data-evaluate-expression, using varobj is the recommended
> way. I don't think "named expressions" is the key here -- if MI was an interface
> in any object oriented language, you would not need varobj name at all. But since MI
> is pipe interface, you need some opaque token instead of object reference in a
> programming language. So no fundamentally named expression are involved.
> How about:
>
> Variable object is the recommended MI interface to work with expressions.
This doesn't give a clue why it is the recommended way. I have
another suggestion, based on what you explained above:
Variable objects are an MI convenience feature to reference
expressions. When a frontend creates a variable object, it
specifies a name for an arbitrary expression in the debugged
program. That name can henceforth be used as an opaque handle for
the expression. The expression can be a simple variable, or it can
be ...
Okay?
> > > Child variable objects can children themself,
> > > +util we reach leaf variable objects of built-in types. ^^^^^^^^
> > ^^^^
> > Typos, and also something's wrong with this sentence in general.
>
> Changed to:
>
>
> Child variable objects can themself have children,
> util we reach leaf variable objects of built-in types.
Hmmm... something is still wrong. I think you meant this:
A child variable object can itself have children, until we reach
leaf variable objects which have built-in types.
> Revised patch attached -- hopefully better this time.
Yes, thanks. The above two gotchas are the only things that need to
be taken care of.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-05 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-19 8:04 Vladimir Prus
2006-12-19 22:29 ` Nick Roberts
2006-12-20 11:47 ` Vladimir Prus
2006-12-20 20:52 ` Nick Roberts
2006-12-21 6:15 ` Vladimir Prus
2006-12-26 15:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-12-26 15:52 ` Vladimir Prus
2006-12-26 22:38 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-01-04 18:21 ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-04 18:23 ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-04 21:48 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-01-05 8:39 ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-05 9:26 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2007-01-08 14:50 ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-08 19:45 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-01-08 20:09 ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-09 4:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
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=u8xgh25az.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=ghost@cs.msu.su \
/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