This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFA: >, >>, and "tee" operators


I think this was raised before (fernando and I discussed it somewhere on
gdb@). GDB is used on systems that are not even UNIX like (namely DJGPP), trying to tie the syntax to UNIX is such a good idea. GDB needs a syntax spec, the current piece meal aproach is regrettable :-(

If the command was called ``log'' rather than ``tee'' then I don't think we would have problems with ``log -a''. (I'm not saying that log is the right name mind.)

Well, I find the DOS-ish '/' separator much nastier than '-' options.
The `/' would most likely have come from VMS or a precursor. VMS has [had?] a remarkably well structured (too well structured?) CLI interface (I show my heritage :-).

A question of personal taste.  ``log'' unfortunately is more like
``tee'' than it is like redirection; how about a simple ``redirect''
command?

  redirect [-a[ppend]] FILE [COMMAND]
  log [-a[ppend]] FILE [COMMAND]
Or `log/a FILE [COMMAND]' or, hmm, something like:

set log write FILE
set log redirect FILE
set log append FILE
show log

and

log[/a] FILE command-that-isn't-optional

Same for redirect.

Are you proposing that ``print/FMT'' gets replaced by ``print -FMT''. There shouldn't be two conflicting syntaxes.

Andrew



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]