From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29205 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2006 13:49:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 29123 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2006 13:49:51 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from gandalf.inter.net.il (HELO gandalf.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:49:50 +0000 Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (nitzan.inter.net.il [192.114.186.20]) by gandalf.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.1-GA) with ESMTP id HXF03645; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:49:30 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-10-40.inter.net.il [80.230.10.40]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id CSN27328 (AUTH halo1); Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:49:25 +0200 (IST) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:49:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Vladimir Prus CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <200602171450.16858.ghost@cs.msu.su> (message from Vladimir Prus on Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:50:16 +0300) Subject: Re: MI: type prefixes for values Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200602171329.34297.ghost@cs.msu.su> <200602171450.16858.ghost@cs.msu.su> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00169.txt.bz2 > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:50:16 +0300 > > On Friday 17 February 2006 14:26, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Vladimir Prus > > > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:29:33 +0300 > > > Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com > > > > > > > Are you saying that you don't want to show your users the fact that > > > > the pointed object is a function? > > > > > > At the very least, not in the way that gdb assumes. > > > > In what way, then? > > It's only avaiable in tooltip text for a variable. So far, no complaints. I don't see how is this contrary to what GDB assumes. GDB passes the information to the front end; how the front end displays it, is entirely up to the front end. The important thing is, you do use this information. > In the output of print, the type of variable is sometimes wrapped in > {}, sometimes in (), and there are no formal rules a frontend author > can use to extract type from this information. The formal rules can be stated, if that's what is missing. The code that produces the parentheses is deterministic, so the rules for when they are used can be defined. > > and why should we force the front end to send > > yet another command to get this information? > > Because it has to do this anyway -- the type is embedded in value only for > some special types, and frontend needs type information anyway. Then perhaps we should add the type info to all arguments, instead of removing it from where it exists now.