From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-23219-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 31776 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2005 04:36:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 31713 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Nov 2005 04:36:05 -0000
Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:36:05 +0000
Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54)
	id 1EbsY7-0003Hh-9N; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:36:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:36:00 -0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Letters reserved for future use
Message-ID: <20051115043603.GB12583@nevyn.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
References: <8f2776cb0511141706n692c7d51j1ffa959bf1961948@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8f2776cb0511141706n692c7d51j1ffa959bf1961948@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00289.txt.bz2

On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 05:06:32PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote:
> In (gdb)Remote Serial Protocol, every upper- and lower-case letter
> that is not given a meaning is marked individually as "reserved for
> future use".  This is kind of dopey.  Could we just have one remark at
> the top that says that all upper- and lower-case letters not defined
> there are reserved for future use?

What Eli said :-)

> What should people looking to make vendor-specific extensions to the
> protocol do?  Are they required to stay within the general query /
> general set commands, with a vendor prefix?

That's what I've done in the past.  Well, I've also done a certain
amount of just Making Stuff Up, but that's not what I recommend when
people ask me :-)

A reserved "long command" prefix that isn't in the query namespace
might help aesthetically, but would offer no technical value.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC