From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-34714-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 679 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2009 23:31:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 671 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jun 2009 23:31:38 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 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) (216.239.45.13)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:31:28 +0000
Received: from zps37.corp.google.com (zps37.corp.google.com [172.25.146.37]) 	by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n5INVQb6009957 	for <gdb@sourceware.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:31:26 -0700
Received: from gxk3 (gxk3.prod.google.com [10.202.11.3]) 	by zps37.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n5INVNdh027164 	for <gdb@sourceware.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:31:24 -0700
Received: by gxk3 with SMTP id 3so5322236gxk.10         for <gdb@sourceware.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.90.82.17 with SMTP id f17mr1576109agb.17.1245367883824; Thu,  	18 Jun 2009 16:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:31:00 -0000
Message-ID: <e394668d0906181631t79dd79d5wb0d9c290eb2cbcca@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: SYMFILE_VERBOSE
From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
To: Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com>, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb <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: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00187.txt.bz2

Random minor question of the day:
Is SYMFILE_VERBOSE misnamed (and/or misused) ?

symfile.c has this:

static void
symbol_file_add_main_1 (char *args, int from_tty, int flags)
{
  const int add_flags = SYMFILE_MAINLINE | (from_tty ? SYMFILE_VERBOSE : 0);
  symbol_file_add (args, add_flags, NULL, flags);


"from_tty" has a specific connotation which doesn't always just mean
"be chatty", and converting it to the name "VERBOSE" might cause
confusion given that there's also info_verbose, and there are places
of code that test "from_tty || info_verbose".  Plus in
symbol_file_add_with_addrs_or_offsets it means more than just "be
chatty":

  if ((have_full_symbols () || have_partial_symbols ())
      && mainline
      && from_tty
      && !query (_("Load new symbol table from \"%s\"? "), name))
    error (_("Not confirmed."));


 It's not a problem today, per se, just wondering about down the road ...

OOC, was SYMFILE_FROM_TTY considered and rejected?