Re: Pending breakpoints and scripts

[Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:39:05PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>>>On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:24:32PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The real problem here is with batch scripts, the change breaks existing 
>>>
>>>>>>script behavior (which is never a good thing).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How about this, we introduce:
>>>>>>	nquery()
>>>>>>	yquery()
>>>>>>where the default (batch mode, and when return is pressed is n/y 
>>>>>>respectively).  We'd need the language police to look over the 
>>>>
>>>>interface >>but should otherwize be ok.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Works for me.
>>>

Me too.

>>>>Lets see if we can pin down the interface (adding JeffJ to the CC list):
>>>>
>>>>nquery("A question?")
>>>>
>>>>	A question? [n]:
>>>>
>>>>	- press return => implied "n"
>>>>	- batch mode => implied "n"
>>>
>>>
>>>How would you feel about "[n/y]"?  Otherwise, I like this.
>>
>>As in?
> 
> 
> nquery("A question?");
>   A question? (n or y) <CURSOR>
> 
> or
> 
>   A question? [n/y]: <CURSOR>
> 
> Simply to clarify that it is a yes-no question.
> 

I agree you have to indicate a yes/no question.  Would it be clearer to add 
square brackets around the default in each case ([y] or n) vs (y or [n])?  This 
is closer to the old query which was (y or n).

-- Jeff J.