From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-40203-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 22451 invoked by alias); 4 Jul 2005 04:55:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 22439 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Jul 2005 04:55:43 -0000
Received: from romy.inter.net.il (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 04 Jul 2005 04:55:43 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-208-218.inter.net.il [83.130.208.218])
	by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.8-GR)
	with ESMTP id BTA60968 (AUTH halo1);
	Mon, 4 Jul 2005 07:55:16 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 04:55:00 -0000
Message-Id: <ull4np132.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>, Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <20050703195630.GM13811@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel
	Jacobowitz on Sun, 3 Jul 2005 15:56:30 -0400)
Subject: Re: [PATCH: gdb/mi + doco] -var-update
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <16929.8147.933720.246602@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <16955.41017.161288.832646@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050401024942.GA2179@white> <17013.35649.62745.226730@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050502040526.GA10023@nevyn.them.org> <17013.54662.20554.239976@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050617034329.GH17013@nevyn.them.org> <uoea51bqt.fsf@gnu.org> <20050617140410.GA24575@nevyn.them.org> <ud5qk0z51.fsf@gnu.org> <20050703195630.GM13811@nevyn.them.org>
X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2

> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 15:56:30 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>, Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>,
> 	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> Personally, I think --no-values and --all-values are a reasonable pair. 
> But in any case, we all seem agreed that --no-values, --simple-values,
> and --all-values are a reasonable triplet.
> 
> Nick, here's a patch based on yours which adds -var-list-children
> --simple-values and -var-update --simple-values/--all-values.  I like
> it; I think --simple-values is useful (since for anything other than
> simple values, an IDE is likely to want to print each member
> individually...).
> 
> I didn't revise the documentation because your last posted patch didn't
> include the current manual diff.  I also didn't write any testcases. 
> Both of these need to be done before the patch goes in.  Tested on
> i686-pc-linux-gnu, both the testsuite and by hand for -var-update.
> 
> No incompatible changes, option consistency, and behavior consistency. 
> I don't think I can do any better than this :-)  Nick, Eli, are you
> both OK with this version of the code changes?

It's okay with me, but I hope we won't forget the doco changes to go
with these.

Thanks.