This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc] python API exposing inferior's frame stack.
El dom, 15-03-2009 a las 21:21 +0200, Eli Zaretskii escribiÃ:
> > From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com>
> > El mar, 10-03-2009 a las 21:35 +0200, Eli Zaretskii escribiÃ:
> > > Is "older" widespread enough to be self-explanatory?
> >
> > "older" is the name of the Frame method used to get the previous frame
> > (where "previous" is the convention used in the GDB source code), so it
> > has a good chance of being clear to the user of the Python API. In any
> > case, I reworded it to:
> >
> > "Return an integer representing the reason why it's not possible to find
> > frames older (outer) than this."
>
> I prefer "frames previous to this one". We already use similar
> wording in frame_stop_reason_string.
I don't like "previous" and "next". They are not clear enough. I think
you prefer this only because you're used to its meaning in the GDB
source code. If they were clear enough, the following clarification
wouldn't be necessary in frame.h:
/* Given a FRAME, return the next (more inner, younger) or previous
(more outer, older) frame. */
extern struct frame_info *get_prev_frame (struct frame_info *);
extern struct frame_info *get_next_frame (struct frame_info *);
I explicitly avoided such wording in the Python Frame API, preferring to
use "older" and "newer". In the doc strings and documentation, I also
use "outer" and "inner", which I still think conforms to be stack
chapter in the GDB manual.
> > > > +@defmethod Frame older
> > > > +Return the frame immediately older (outer) to this frame.
> > > > +@end defmethod
> > > > +
> > > > +@defmethod Frame newer
> > > > +Return the frame immetidaely newer (inner) to this frame.
> > > > +@end defmethod
> > >
> > > Suggest to use "higher" or "above" or "towards the outermost frame".
> > > Generally, try to use the terminology from the "Examining the Stack"
> > > chapter of the manual.
> >
> > IMHO, "inner" and "outer" are already conforming to the terminology from
> > the "Examining the Stack" chapter. It is a bit awkward to use "towards
> > the outermost frame" to describe these methods, e.g.:
> >
> > "Return the next frame in the direction towards the outermost frame."
> >
> > and
> >
> > "Return the next frame in the direction towards the innermost frame."
> >
> > Mmm... Now that I tried, doesn't sound too bad. But still I find my
> > original wording more direct and simpler to understand. What do you
> > think?
>
> We use "innermost" in the manual much more than "inner". You can also
> use "previous" and "next" if you like that better.
Why "innermost" is acceptable but "inner" is not? I don't see why the
different treatment. If one can be used, the other should be allowed
too, no?
> Also note that there's a typo in the quoted fragment ("immetidaely").
Fixed, thanks.
--
[]'s
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center