From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Berlin To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Daniel Berlin , GDB Discussion Subject: Re: 5.1 NEWS Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 22:06:00 -0000 Message-id: <87lmlyr8sj.fsf@cgsoftware.com> References: <3B474597.1020708@cygnus.com> <87u20owqvw.fsf@cgsoftware.com> <3B491A68.8010801@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00072.html Andrew Cagney writes: > Hmm, how can I put this. > > GDB's Pascal support is new, people will have reasonable expectations > and a keenness to help fix it. GDB's C++ support, on the other hand, > is old. Unless told otherwize, people are going to assume that it all > works perfectly, even for the new v3 C++ ABI. > > In using the word ``limited'', I'm trying to set expecations. If you > think there is a better turn of phrase then please put it forward. > Err, I have no problem with the words "limited support for the C++ v3.0 ABI". Put whatever you want there. I'm just concerned that saying just "Pascal support" without qualifying it will cause the user's expectations to be higher than they should be. I.E. If I read in a news file that a debugger now had "Fortran Support", I'd expect it to be at the same level as all the other languages, whether it's new or not. > Andrew > > >> Andrew Cagney writes: >> >>> Hello, >>> The NEWS file could do with a few more updates. >>> Pascal and ``limited support for the C++ v3.0 ABI'' come to mind. >> Pascal support doesn't work all that well. >> For starters, it doesn't even set the case sensitivity to off in the language >> definition, for instance. Forget about actually doing good pascal debugging. >> I noticed it barely works when I started verifying i did the right >> thing for fortran and pascal in the new typesystem. >> So if you put something about pascal, put "limited pascal support". > -- "I went to the hardware store and bought some used paint. It was in the shape of a house. I also bought some batteries, but they weren't included. So I had to buy them again. "-Steven Wright