This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC - Python scripting] New methods Symtab.global_block and Symtab.static_block (docs included)
- From: Siva Chandra <sivachandra at google dot com>
- To: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>
- Cc: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>, Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>, ratmice at gmail dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 23:10:53 +0530
- Subject: Re: [RFC - Python scripting] New methods Symtab.global_block and Symtab.static_block (docs included)
- References: <CAGyQ6gyuJ1oYBH3O5gzNc7Y7NK7AGC2F9a8Z3ts4dMm0GpVy0g@mail.gmail.com> <831unms3jy.fsf@gnu.org> <CAGyQ6gxxEeYeCKw_iHXh74Gg223GHxMoW=gvt9kU+ax396kKBQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAGyQ6gy+i4Tdh4zWDi_+cR+kw3MiU23BvWXgBqu5-+E48rjssw@mail.gmail.com> <4F8F187D.3050402@redhat.com> <878vhsojgd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <CAGyQ6gzC_2hZfhBv4SQNGVem0bOLxMp+02Nmy=iwPtqNE=J8kg@mail.gmail.com> <CADPb22TvvQDSA1EL4ydoZRGkKBm1kTCGcHyB2dc3X28p8XqyAg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGyQ6gzK7FvC0EYvJD+DGnCRssbNREoSjdROfpbv0u22sBNOKQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACTLOFrp7Hg0ZG8h=NVkyjD-_400Zv=Zdrf2Lq_OW-ga=qiTbw@mail.gmail.com> <87sjfyi5rj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <CADPb22RMzJpQDGhDU3b=R_sL2y_wd5y+qGJ+1t0sqbNWioPn9w@mail.gmail.com> <CAGyQ6gxAs2i+f0K5SGKV2h+Ltg439PVYSRuuD1BcMCGObi20Wg@mail.gmail.com> <87lilmh9jf.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83y5pmft8k.fsf@gnu.org> <4F95630D.1000202@redhat.com> <83vckqfpzb.fsf@gnu.org> <87ehrcco7v.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <CAGyQ6gw=x97Sf9QjtwzrcvVEOC=kuM455cNe-gviqFiQRvBKmA@mail.gmail.com> <CADPb22ROUFA4ZAZQ6RphELbdHDWCV0wsuYB+BKA27__dLppokQ@mail.gmail.com>
Tom> I think the difficulty here is that saying nothing may also lull Python
Tom> users into a false sense of security that we will not change things in
Tom> this area.
Tom> But, we'd still like the freedom to change things. ?For example, we've
Tom> talked off and on about implementing "hierarchical" symbol tables, where
Tom> the symbols in a namespace (e.g.) are kept in the namespace symbol, not
Tom> globally.
Tom> If we made this sort of change, then iterating over the block would
Tom> return different results.
Tom> Maybe there is some way to rewrite the original text to give us some
Tom> leeway.
Siva> Does this note to user need to be a part of this patch?
Doug> fwiw, my opinion is "No.".
Doug> That would just be making you put too much effort into form over
substance.
Doug> If you want to, go for it. ?But it's not necessary (IMO).
Doug> We may want to hold off checking things in until the doc text is
ready though.
Now that the note to the user is in, is this patch ready to go in as
well? Tom and Eli have already OK-ed, but I am double checking as it
has been a while since then.
Thanks,
Siva Chandra