From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 561 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2009 17:04:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 551 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Nov 2009 17:04:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:04:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nAUH4GAs000681 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:04:16 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nAUH4FTO000831; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:04:15 -0500 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nAUH4Era031614; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:04:15 -0500 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 484E837818D; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:04:14 -0700 (MST) From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Hui Zhu , Michael Snyder , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Let "gcore" command accept a suffix argument References: <4B11DA3C.3000203@vmware.com> <20091130162246.GE4034@adacore.com> Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:53:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20091130162246.GE4034@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:22:46 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-11/txt/msg00221.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: >> For example: >> set $a=0 >> gcore $a >> Saved corefile 0 Joel> Am I the only one who really doesn't like this idea? Nope. Joel> I'm surprised at my own reaction, since Joel> it is not going to affect me all that much, and so I will let it go Joel> if others like it (but it feels like a bandaid to me, and once it's in, Joel> we won't be able to remove it). GDB's command language is already weird and inconsistent. And it does affect you -- it affects all maintainers, because it is hard to justify incompatible changes. So, I think it is better for both maintainers and users if we come up with generic facilities rather than ad hoc ones like this. Tom