From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-58964-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 11675 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2008 06:25:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 11667 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Oct 2008 06:25:50 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout6.012.net.il (HELO mtaout6.012.net.il) (84.95.2.16)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 06:25:10 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.170.116]) by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0K85009NVGHG6D60@i-mtaout6.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:24:52 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 06:25:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Reverse Debugging, 5/5
In-reply-to: <48E550B0.1070103@vmware.com>
X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, drow@false.org, pedro@codesourcery.com, teawater@gmail.com
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <uk5cqi4cx.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <48E3CD66.9020600@vmware.com> <umyhmixqu.fsf@gnu.org> <48E550B0.1070103@vmware.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: 2008-10/txt/msg00080.txt.bz2

> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:52:32 -0700
> From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
> CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, 
>  "drow@false.org" <drow@false.org>,
>  "pedro@codesourcery.com" <pedro@codesourcery.com>, 
>  "teawater@gmail.com" <teawater@gmail.com>
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> >> +  add_com ("reverse-next", class_run, reverse_next, _("\
> >> +Step program backward, proceeding through subroutine calls.\n\
> >                         ^
> > Won't commands like "apropos" stop at the first comma when they
> > display the short descriptions of commands?
> 
> Hmmm, you know, "next" has the same issue.
> 
> (gdb) apropos next
> [...]
> next -- Step program
> nexti -- Step one instruction
> 
> 
> ... why does it stop after a comma, anyways?

I have no idea, it's something that came into existence long before I
started hacking GDB.

I'd say, if not too many doc strings use the comma at the end of the
first line, let's modify them to use a period, and remove this
annoying limitation, leaving only the period.  WDYT?