From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28369 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2019 21:22:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 28360 invoked by uid 89); 16 Apr 2019 21:22:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*i:sk:33981fb, H*f:sk:33981fb X-HELO: mailsec114.isp.belgacom.be Received: from mailsec114.isp.belgacom.be (HELO mailsec114.isp.belgacom.be) (195.238.20.110) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 21:22:01 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=skynet.be; i=@skynet.be; q=dns/txt; s=securemail; t=1555449721; x=1586985721; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Oxa34K5WfLYZNHHAOaGg5A5mW4XFjpTHnQji+zp1XXk=; b=rGRjUdjFH3COgD7KGWWxuJa4oQ+lxpoJ+4xtzZMocHUfpjauqiSdOV3p m0+ZEptIEz5+5cHT8elR41HnoghhEw==; Received: from unknown (HELO md) ([109.131.123.45]) by relay.skynet.be with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Apr 2019 23:21:59 +0200 Message-ID: <1555449719.6208.1.camel@skynet.be> Subject: Re: / (slash) command : fast way to temporarily change setting(s) to run a command From: Philippe Waroquiers To: Simon Marchi Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 21:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <33981fb59a1202b4e00dc7d4b5a77089@polymtl.ca> References: <1555313564.1473.2.camel@skynet.be> <0dd32aff-8b46-92c8-5761-6b4f72efbaf0@polymtl.ca> <1555397322.1473.10.camel@skynet.be> <33981fb59a1202b4e00dc7d4b5a77089@polymtl.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-04/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 On Tue, 2019-04-16 at 08:20 -0400, Simon Marchi wrote: > > Ah yeah, that sounds good too, I would be consistent with the fact that > just like you can do: > > (gdb) p 10 > $4 = 10 > (gdb) p/x > $5 = 0xa > > Does it mean that as a side-effect, "/" alone would repeat the previos > command unaltered? The previous command can be run by just typing Return, so I think we can keep slash command checking that at least one setting was given. I thought that implementing a command that would re-run the previous saved_command_line would mean to just look/use saved_command_line. But when a command runs, saved_command_line already contains the line of the currently running command. Slightly unexpected but not a big deal: it is very easy to add previous_saved_command_line. Philippe