This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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: [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"

From: Andrew STUBBS <andrew dot stubbs at st dot com>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 13:56:55 +0100
Subject: Re: [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"
References: <200805061649.50105.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20080509014720.GB22833@caradoc.them.org> <200805090307.47327.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200805091308.28842.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20080509122003.GA24290@caradoc.them.org>

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

If you don't like the all prefix then we can go back to continue
--all, or even just continue all.  Continue takes a numeric argument
and all will not conflict.

That doesn't sound very future proof. Somebody might like to refer to named threads some day (our thread implementation has names, although the debugger doesn't accept them as input just yet).

How about just "continueall" and "ca"?

Andrew

References:
- [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"
  - From: Pedro Alves
- Re: [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz
- Re: [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"
  - From: Pedro Alves
- Re: [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"
  - From: Pedro Alves
- Re: [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

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