Re: GDB Speak: `inferior' rather than `target'?

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>]

> On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 03:38:03PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> In trying to correctly and clearly word some gdb comments (and yes ok, 
>> and internal doco), I'm left wondering if we should `newspeak' some 
>> terminology here and use the word `inferior' instead of `target'.
>> 
>> The problem with `target' is that it is totally overloaded.  The 
>> configuration target, the running target the target architecture, ....
>> 
>> Hence, when refering to an instance of the program being debugged, the 
>> word `inferior' should be used.  Of course, this would mean that `core' 
>> becomes an inferior (...).
> 
> 
> I've always used inferior only for a running target, generally a
> ptraced one locally.  But that's just my usage.
> 
> I'm with Kevin - I don't like either inferior or target.  I'd suggest
> punting to debugee but it's too cumbersome.

Not being in common use doesn't rule out GDB adopting it.  That is what 
good documentation (and a glosary) is for :-) (Debug engineers aren't 
exactly lying about on the ground so I'd not be suprized if its use 
wasn't common.  Perhaphs other debugers have other terms.

(debugee makes me cringe :-)

Andrew