From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-31571-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 27123 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2008 17:13:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 27114 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Apr 2008 17:13:10 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from heller.inter.net.il (HELO heller.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.23)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:12:47 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-229-231-225.inter.net.il [84.229.231.225]) 	by heller.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) 	with ESMTP id FKV72592 (AUTH halo1); 	Sat, 5 Apr 2008 20:12:42 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 18:54:00 -0000
Message-Id: <umyo8rzsk.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <jey77sp7xr.fsf@sykes.suse.de> (message from Andreas Schwab on 	Sat, 05 Apr 2008 18:45:04 +0200)
Subject: Re: Strangeness in set command
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <uod8os2n1.fsf@gnu.org> <jey77sp7xr.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
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: 2008-04/txt/msg00053.txt.bz2

> From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
> Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
> Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 18:45:04 +0200
> 
> >   (gdb) set s.st_mode=0x1ff
> >   Ambiguous set command "s.st_mode=0x1ff"
> >
> > But this succeeds:
> >
> >   (gdb) set (&s)->st_mode=0x1ff
> >
> > How come we are smart enough to support the latter, but not the
> > former?
> 
> Because there are several set commands beginning with s.  Use set
> variable to avoid the ambiguity.

Thanks.

Does anyone object to improving the error message to mention "set
variable"?