From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32163 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2005 19:56:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 32153 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Nov 2005 19:56:02 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:56:01 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-228-140-221.inter.net.il [84.228.140.221]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.6.5-GR) with ESMTP id BZW36003 (AUTH halo1); Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:53:46 +0200 (IST) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:29:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Andrew STUBBS , schwab@suse.de CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20051123191940.GA20765@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:19:40 -0500) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix 'Undefined command' error message Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4379EC0A.3060601@st.com> <20051116201300.GA23472@nevyn.them.org> <4382072A.1010402@st.com> <43849117.5030805@st.com> <4384BD74.1060600@st.com> <20051123191940.GA20765@nevyn.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00441.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 14:19:40 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , schwab@suse.de, > gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > > The TUI does *not* avoid the problems pointed out by Andreas. 'u+1' must > > be written 'u +1'. The latter syntax seems more correct to me in any > > case - the '+' is part of the operand, not the command. That said, many > > people are probably used to using the command like Andreas. > > I had no idea this was possible (or what it did, until I tried it)... I > wouldn't cry about breaking it if there was any benefit. Sorry, Daniel, I don't think I get what you mean. Could you please elaborate on what you suggest we do?