From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22713 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2005 09:55:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22147 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jun 2005 09:55:03 -0000 Received: from legolas.inter.net.il (HELO legolas.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:55:03 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-153-6.inter.net.il [80.230.153.6]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id EQD07160 (AUTH halo1); Fri, 17 Jun 2005 12:54:53 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:55:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com CC: nickrob@snap.net.nz In-reply-to: <20050617032149.GF17013@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:21:49 -0400) Subject: Re: [PATCH] -stack-select-frame Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <17072.62436.183299.55978@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050616044209.GA5907@nevyn.them.org> <17073.5179.249482.402135@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050616132120.GA5277@nevyn.them.org> <17074.566.194312.713028@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050616234728.GA14260@nevyn.them.org> <17074.16093.924351.774111@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050617032149.GF17013@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00249.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:21:49 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > Maybe it is time to mark the unimplemented commands in the manual? They should generally be excluded from the manual. Feel free to ifdef them away (using @ignore..@end ignore), with a comment saying that they are not implemented yet. If you don't have time, I will get to that eventually. Thanks for drawing my attention to this command; I must have missed it when I excluded all the other unimplemented MI commands while integrating gdbmi.texinfo into the manual. > I'm not real thrilled with doing this; we don't get to decide what > people do or do not use, so documenting things that people do use as > unstable does no one any favors. However, I've been hearing a lot of > convincing points that we have more freedom here than I thought. So > I'm getting more comfortable with changes. I, too, prefer stabilizing MI to saying that it's unstable. But if no one steps forward to do the work, I see nothing wrong in warning users that a particular GDB area is under construction.