From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6048 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2002 16:49:46 -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 6030 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2002 16:49:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Oct 2002 16:49:44 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (tooth.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.29]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B61800090; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:49:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3DB03B3E.1020208@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 09:49:00 -0000 From: Fernando Nasser Organization: Red Hat Canada User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020607 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Keith Seitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] MI varobj testsuite support References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00132.txt.bz2 Keith Seitz wrote: > It's only a convenience. I find it easier to write "Varobj::create foo" > than "-var-create foo * foo"; I can never remember the whole syntax > without looking it up. > I am concerned with the legibility of the tests and when people may be reproducing parts of it by hand. The "-var-create foo * foo" is better for that. The other commands generate a very simple output that is easy to create an pattern for and it is also easier for human interpretation (same situation as above). The "pattern" part is cool though. Why don't you submit just that for now? -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9