Bingo. And it's also the way our ide talks to gdb. If the exec
filename
>> >is
>> >not set, gdb treats the first argument to run as the path to the file
and
>> >subsequent arguments as regular args.
>
>>
>> I don't think that change would be accepted into GDB. It makes `run'
>> just too modal :-/
>
>
> That was my first reaction too. But he's not describing a local change
> to GDB - we already do this! Argh!
Yes, arrrg! Bug!
Why arrrgh? I know it makes run a little context sensitive but I don't
think anyone trips on it. The normal usage pattern of gdb precludes people
having problems with it and it's very useful for us. I still haven't heard
any suggestions of how we might accomplish what we do.
In a single sentence, what does this command do?