From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24760 invoked by alias); 31 May 2002 07:29:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24712 invoked from network); 31 May 2002 07:29:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO odin.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 May 2002 07:29:08 -0000 Received: from Zaretsky ([80.230.2.40]) by odin.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.1.0.58-GA) with ESMTP id AFP14622; Fri, 31 May 2002 10:28:58 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 00:29:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: dhoward@redhat.com Message-Id: <3995-Fri31May2002102222+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Don Howard on Thu, 30 May 2002 17:24:05 -0700 (PDT)) Subject: Re: Redefining built-in commands. Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00336.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 17:24:05 -0700 (PDT) > From: Don Howard > > Should gdb allow users to redefine built-in commands? I think it should, unless we cannot do it safely. > If so, should the > orignial alias continue to behave like the original built-in, or should > it's behavior be modified also? I'm not 100% sure, but I tend to think the aliases that are mere abbreviations, like `n' for `next', should be redefined to the new command, while aliases which aren't abbreviations should be left to point to the original command. But if the above cannot be done, we should either redefine the aliases to the new command, or disable the aliases entirely. Crashing is not an option, obviously.