From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17308 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2008 03:22:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 17299 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Apr 2008 03:22:13 -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; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:21:54 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.228.217]) by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0K04003TGCNZNUZ3@i-mtaout6.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 06:36:00 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:54:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [RFC][patch 0/9] Python support in GDB In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: tromey@redhat.com Cc: bauerman@br.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <20080429155212.444237503@br.ibm.com> <1209493060.25413.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00682.txt.bz2 > X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham > version=3.1.0 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org > From: Tom Tromey > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:37:35 -0600 > > >>>>> "Thiago" == Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: > > Thiago> You are right of course, I forgot to talk about this in the e-mail, > Thiago> sorry. The reason there is no documentation right now is that we want to > Thiago> do it after it is clear what will be the final form fo python support. > Thiago> It could be what is in these patches, but it can change based on further > Thiago> discussion. > > I completely agree with Thiago here. Also, a similar consideration > applies to the test suite. I understand the urge to avoid unnecessary work. That is why I said _minimal_ documentation. I find it hard to believe that nothing can be said about this feature that will not change based on further discussion. Unless all that discussion happens before the patches are committed to the GDB CVS, in which case I have no problems waiting till then. But whenever the patches are actually committed, I will object to doing so without some minimal documentation that describes its usage.