From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4399 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2009 22:24:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 4390 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Apr 2009 22:24:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 22:24:29 +0000 Received: from zps76.corp.google.com (zps76.corp.google.com [172.25.146.76]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n34MOP7u031528 for ; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:24:26 +0100 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rvbk29.prod.google.com [10.140.87.29]) by zps76.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n34MOOeQ021560 for ; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 15:24:24 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id k29so1438215rvb.34 for ; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 15:24:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.142.11 with SMTP id p11mr1295877rvd.234.1238883864100; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 15:24:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090404192132.GA28232@caradoc.them.org> References: <20090404184604.8524C1C759C@localhost> <200904041904.n34J4UXV013513@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20090404192132.GA28232@caradoc.them.org> Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 22:35:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: improved thread id reporting From: Doug Evans To: gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> > 2) When switching to a thread IWBN to also report the thread being swi= tched >> > =A0 =A0from, otherwise one has to scrollback through the session to fi= nd it >> > =A0 =A0(assuming that's even possible). >> >> That's not an unreasonable suggestion. > > Agreed, although I'm curious what people think of "to X from Y" vs > "from Y to X" - I found your sample visually confusing. I like from/to better than to/from - I only picked to/from because it seemed like less of a change (however minor) over the existing text (YMMV).