From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25129 invoked by alias); 2 Dec 2002 20:44:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25076 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 20:44:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Dec 2002 20:44:13 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB2KIwP10718 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:18:58 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB2KhnD04047; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:43:49 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-31.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.31]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB2Khn118653; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:43:49 -0500 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id gB2Khhb05786; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:43:43 -0700 Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 12:44:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1021202204343.ZM5785@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Andrew Cagney "GDB Speak: `inferior' rather than `target'?" (Dec 2, 3:38pm) References: <3DEBC4AB.9020706@redhat.com> To: Andrew Cagney , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB Speak: `inferior' rather than `target'? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00026.txt.bz2 On Dec 2, 3:38pm, Andrew Cagney wrote: > 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 (...). > > Thoughts? I may be wrong, but it's my impression that the use of the word `inferior' to describe an instance of the program being debugged is unique to GDB. That said, I don't think that the word `target' is appropriate either. I wish we could come up with some other term altogether... Kevin