From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22505 invoked by alias); 15 May 2009 15:53:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 22492 invoked by uid 22791); 15 May 2009 15:53:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 May 2009 15:53:48 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC6E42BAD05; Fri, 15 May 2009 11:53:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id QHbU2zDILYFa; Fri, 15 May 2009 11:53:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70BF42BAB75; Fri, 15 May 2009 11:53:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3ACACF5962; Fri, 15 May 2009 17:53:44 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 15:53:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Paul Pluzhnikov , pluto@agmk.net, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: overloading 'print' command. Message-ID: <20090515155344.GC17566@adacore.com> References: <8ac60eac0905141617g1db278e5l906eef8f5b899ed4@mail.gmail.com> <83preargj6.fsf@gnu.org> <8ac60eac0905150707n38e82ebcw49a4f46d476ef7f@mail.gmail.com> <83k54iqvgk.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83k54iqvgk.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00085.txt.bz2 > > I don't see how hook-print can help OP to do something special for > > std::string. The manual says hook-print doesn't get any arguments, so > > it can't even tell what is being printed. What am I missing? > > Looks like I was missing something: the fact that hooks don't have > access to the arguments of the hooked command. Sounds like a bad > limitation to me. I think that the hooks mechanism is quickly going to be overtaken by python support, so I personally wouldn't spend any more time on improving the hooks - especially when the feature is already available in today's FSF sources. -- Joel