This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Return to Reverse Execution
- From: Paul Gilliam <pgilliam at us dot ibm dot com>
- To: Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com, Johan Rydberg <jrydberg at virtutech dot com>, "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>, Dave Brolley <brolley at redhat dot com>, Eric Bachalo <ebachalo at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 14:31:00 -0800
- Subject: Re: Return to Reverse Execution
- References: <43BC376F.4000307@redhat.com> <20060106195720.GB18951@nevyn.them.org>
- Reply-to: pgilliam at us dot ibm dot com
My $0.02:
On Friday 06 January 2006 11:57, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 01:00:31PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
> > So here is my proposed gdb user interface.
> > 1) A set of new commands that mimic the existing ones,
> > to include:
> > reverse-step (rs)
> > reverse-next (rn)
> > reverse-continue (rc)
> > reverse-finish (rf)
>
> I'm fine with these names. I think that we are not going to reach a
> consensus on whether "reverse" or "back" is better, but I don't think that
> means we should offer both; I think we should just pick one, use it
> consistently, and document it consistently.
>
'back' has 57% fewer keystrokes than 'reverse'.
-=# Paul #=-