From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12840 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2006 21:53:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 12833 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jan 2006 21:53:11 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 21:53:10 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EuzW4-0006cR-08; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 16:52:56 -0500 Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 21:53:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Paul Gilliam Cc: Michael Snyder , gdb@sources.redhat.com, Johan Rydberg , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Dave Brolley , Eric Bachalo Subject: Re: Return to Reverse Execution Message-ID: <20060106215255.GA25427@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Gilliam , Michael Snyder , gdb@sources.redhat.com, Johan Rydberg , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Dave Brolley , Eric Bachalo References: <43BC376F.4000307@redhat.com> <20060106195720.GB18951@nevyn.them.org> <200601061431.00536.pgilliam@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200601061431.00536.pgilliam@us.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:31:00PM -0800, Paul Gilliam wrote: > My $0.02: > > On Friday 06 January 2006 11:57, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 01:00:31PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: > > > So here is my proposed gdb user interface. > > > 1) A set of new commands that mimic the existing ones, > > > to include: > > > reverse-step (rs) > > > reverse-next (rn) > > > reverse-continue (rc) > > > reverse-finish (rf) > > > > I'm fine with these names. I think that we are not going to reach a > > consensus on whether "reverse" or "back" is better, but I don't think that > > means we should offer both; I think we should just pick one, use it > > consistently, and document it consistently. > > > 'back' has 57% fewer keystrokes than 'reverse'. I intend to use the two-character variants all the time in practice... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery