From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-53597-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 24825 invoked by alias); 26 Jan 2008 19:15:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 24743 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jan 2008 19:14:59 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from heller.inter.net.il (HELO heller.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.23)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 26 Jan 2008 19:14:40 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-218-76.inter.net.il [83.130.218.76]) 	by heller.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) 	with ESMTP id ETU65892 (AUTH halo1); 	Sat, 26 Jan 2008 21:14:33 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 19:58:00 -0000
Message-Id: <uejc4l7q6.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
CC: jimb@codesourcery.com, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, uweigand@de.ibm.com,         msnyder@specifix.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20080121022718.GJ28020@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker 	on Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:27:18 -0800)
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA?] Should break FILE:LINENO skip prologue?
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <200801152140.m0FLeMha003566@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <ur6gipfjm.fsf@gnu.org> <200801161034.m0GAYfpk000326@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <ulk6pppje.fsf@gnu.org> <m3ir1t78s4.fsf@codesourcery.com> <uejchozs8.fsf@gnu.org> <m3ir1snvqy.fsf@codesourcery.com> <uwsq6nd0d.fsf@gnu.org> <20080120150224.GI28020@adacore.com> <uk5m4nuo6.fsf@gnu.org> <20080121022718.GJ28020@adacore.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
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: 2008-01/txt/msg00629.txt.bz2

> Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:27:18 -0800
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: jimb@codesourcery.com, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, uweigand@de.ibm.com,
> 	msnyder@specifix.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> > How about if I say that the extension is in addition to the ``normal''
> > expression syntax?  Like this:
> > 
> >   Here @var{address} may be any expression valid in the current working
> >   language (@pxref{Languages, working language}) that specifies a code
> >   address.  In addition, as a convenience, @value{GDBN} extends the
> >   semantics of expressions...
> 
> Sure, it is clearer.

I made this change, thanks.