Re: Learn function name by its address

[Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>]

Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com> writes:
> 
> Paul> I think removing them would be incorrect: they do exist, MI accepts them,
> Paul> they just don't work :-(
> 
> Ugh.  That seems even worse.
> 
> Paul> Perhaps add a "NOTE: This command has not yet been implemented"
> Paul> to each one?
> 
> Or also nuke the non-working entries from the MI command table.
> I can't think of a reason we'd want to have non-functional commands.
> I'm sure we'd reject a new patch that added such a command.

What about just commenting them out, so that the work isn't lost
and someone may some day implement them?

Same for the docs -- can they be left in the source and just commented out?