From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20262 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2006 19:04:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 20251 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2006 19:04:24 -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, 17 Feb 2006 19:04:23 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FAAtu-00077f-Lu; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:04:18 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:33:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Vladimir Prus , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI: type prefixes for values Message-ID: <20060217190418.GA27304@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Vladimir Prus , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200602171658.23427.ghost@cs.msu.su> <200602171724.03824.ghost@cs.msu.su> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: 2006-02/txt/msg00192.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 17, 2006 at 08:59:41PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I'd never suspect that someone would try to parse MI with such > ad-hoc'ish code. I assumed that a decent parser was being used, and > that this parser could simply choose the right template--either the > one for response with braces, or the one for without. To correct the record, he's not parsing MI here. He's parsing the value encapsulated within MI, the bit in quotes here: value="4000" or: value="{int (int)} 0xffffffff " There's no grammar describing what goes in the value string. The value should pretty clearly be an opaque string to the front end. He's made a good point that the opaque string shouldn't include the function type. I'm not sure about the bit... For array contents he should be using variable objects, though. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery