From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-40871-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 26953 invoked by alias); 21 Sep 2005 03:44:07 -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 26933 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Sep 2005 03:43:57 -0000
Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.20)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 03:43:57 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-29-165.inter.net.il [80.230.29.165])
	by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.6.5-GR)
	with ESMTP id BLZ50520 (AUTH halo1);
	Wed, 21 Sep 2005 06:43:53 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 03:44:00 -0000
Message-Id: <uzmq7gk5h.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <20050920193132.GY2496@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker
	on Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:31:32 -0700)
Subject: Re: [RFA] print arrays with indexes
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <20050917204930.GB8777@nevyn.them.org> <20050917215138.GB2496@adacore.com> <uoe6r59n4.fsf@gnu.org> <20050918034639.GB6990@nevyn.them.org> <20050918054109.GD2496@adacore.com> <umzma5h42.fsf@gnu.org> <20050918191943.GA27191@nevyn.them.org> <uirwy5egh.fsf@gnu.org> <20050920073058.GR2496@adacore.com> <u64svim4h.fsf@gnu.org> <20050920193132.GY2496@adacore.com>
X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00185.txt.bz2

> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:31:32 -0700
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> > If you accept my view above, then threshold value of zero means
> > unlimited.  We already have several set/show commands that behave this
> > way, so I don't see any problem with having yet another.
> 
> Well, looks like you are now suggesting that we drop the idea of having
> on/off aliases, to which I disagree.

The aliases was not my idea, I only agreed to have them.

> How about people like me who want
> this feature OFF all the time, except in rare occasions?

That should be the default, so no problem for people ``like you''.

> To me, it's totally unrelated to what we are discussing. It's just
> a idea that popped up during the course of this discussion.

Then let's discuss it in a separate thread.