From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30509 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2006 14:15:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 30495 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Feb 2006 14:15:41 -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; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:15:40 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FBYIY-0004tX-Q6; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:15:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 20:41:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Vladimir Prus Cc: Eli Zaretskii , bob@brasko.net, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI: type prefixes for values Message-ID: <20060221141526.GB18768@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Prus , Eli Zaretskii , bob@brasko.net, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20060220205735.GA27272@nevyn.them.org> <200602210954.43799.ghost@cs.msu.su> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200602210954.43799.ghost@cs.msu.su> 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/msg00282.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 09:54:43AM +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote: > On Monday 20 February 2006 23:57, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 10:55:44PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > From: Vladimir Prus > > > > Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 10:23:04 +0300 > > > > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , > > > > gdb@sources.redhat.com > > > > > > > > To make an even more specific question, I propose to: > > > > > > > > - Remove type prefix from output of -data-evaluate-expression and > > > > -var-evaluat-expression > > > > > > > > - Add 'type' field to the output of -data-evaluate-expression > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this OK with everyone? > > > > > > I think a better suggestion surfaced in this discussion: don't try to > > > parse the output of -data-evaluate-expression, and use -var-create > > > instead. Is that good enough? If not, why not? > > > > Yes; I think (and Jim's experience seems to confirm) that > > -var-evaluate-expression is sufficiently cheap that if you need > > more than a simple string output, you should use it. > > But output of -var-evaluate-expression includes that "type prefix" too! Yes, I believe we all agreed that it could be removed. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery