Re: GDB Speak: `inferior' rather than `target'?

Andrew Cagney
2002-12-02T21:30:24Z

> On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 03:38:03PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> In trying to correctly and clearly word some gdb comments (and yes ok,
>> and internal doco), I'm left wondering if we should `newspeak' some
>> terminology here and use the word `inferior' instead of `target'.
>>
>> The problem with `target' is that it is totally overloaded. The
>> configuration target, the running target the target architecture, ....
>>
>> Hence, when refering to an instance of the program being debugged, the
>> word `inferior' should be used. Of course, this would mean that `core'
>> becomes an inferior (...).
>
>
> I've always used inferior only for a running target, generally a
> ptraced one locally. But that's just my usage.
>
> I'm with Kevin - I don't like either inferior or target. I'd suggest
> punting to debugee but it's too cumbersome.

Not being in common use doesn't rule out GDB adopting it. That is what
good documentation (and a glosary) is for :-) (Debug engineers aren't
exactly lying about on the ground so I'd not be suprized if its use
wasn't common. Perhaphs other debugers have other terms.

(debugee makes me cringe :-)

Andrew