From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18337 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2009 19:24:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 18327 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Mar 2009 19:24:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_37,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:24:41 +0000 Received: from spaceape14.eur.corp.google.com (spaceape14.eur.corp.google.com [172.28.16.148]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n24JOc2V009081 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:24:38 -0800 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rvfc5.prod.google.com [10.140.180.5]) by spaceape14.eur.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n24JNdQR022663 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:24:36 -0800 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c5so3970074rvf.16 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:24:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.127.20 with SMTP id z20mr110611rvc.100.1236194675951; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:24:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20090303170422.GA15154@caradoc.them.org> Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:24:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What about add a interface to output the assembly codes follow inferior execution From: Doug Evans To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: teawater@gmail.com, drow@false.org, gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-03/txt/msg00040.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 09:15:30 -0800 >> From: Doug Evans >> Cc: Eli Zaretskii , drow@false.org, gdb@sourceware.org >> >> Having another word for "disassembly" seems clumsy though. ["apropos >> opcodes" doesn't print anything today] > > "apropos" searches the first lines of the doc strings, not only the > command names. So if we document the new commands like this: > > show-opcodes -- display disassembly of next line with each prompt > > "apropos disassembly" will find that as well. Does that solve your > problem with the name I suggested? To be honest it doesn't. The point about apropos wasn't that "apropos disassembly" wouldn't find show-opcodes, but rather to point out that we don't use "opcodes" at all. It doesn't even appear in gdb.texinfo. Why not use "disassemble" when disassemble is what we mean? [I'd also hate to see a user type "apropos show" while trying to find show-opcodes. 1/2 :-)] > >> Plus to a new user the intent of the option is a bit vague. >> "disassemble-next-line" ? [that has a lot to type to become >> unambiguous > > Right, I thought about something that begins with "disassemble", but > didn't want to shoot our completion habits in the foot, since > currently typing just "disas TAB" is all I need to get disassembly. > But users type disas a lot. I wouldn't expect them to type `set disassemble-next-line foo' very much at all.