This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] util.c + doc [was Re: [RFC] Queries and frontends]
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: nickrob at snap dot net dot nz (Nick Roberts)
- Cc: tromey at redhat dot com, marc dot khouzam at ericsson dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:50:32 +0300
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] util.c + doc [was Re: [RFC] Queries and frontends]
- References: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA07C00023@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> <19045.23703.743876.775308@totara.tehura.co.nz> <m37hxwm3wr.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <19053.2107.342469.683795@totara.tehura.co.nz> <m3iqheje2p.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <19054.23189.193878.534661@totara.tehura.co.nz> <m3r5vztcpw.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <19056.57733.247579.68268@totara.tehura.co.nz> <83zlamsw22.fsf@gnu.org> <19064.2410.863604.37792@totara.tehura.co.nz>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:11:54 +1200
> Cc: tromey@redhat.com, marc.khouzam@ericsson.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> From: nickrob@snap.net.nz (Nick Roberts)
>
> > "value of `show confirm' command" sounds awkward (a command cannot
> > have a value). Can you suggest a better wording?
>
> Perhaps it's enough to say that they are disabled and point to the existing
> description.
> [...]
> + It also disables confirmation requests (@pxref{confirmation requests}).
Yes, that's good, but the sentence is too far from the first paragraph
of this section to make "It" self-explanatory. How about the variant
below?
The @code{server } prefix also disables confirmation requests
(@pxref{confirmation requests}).