This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH: gdb/mi + doco] -var-update
> > I'm not familiar with this device but this line has been cut and pasted
> > from mi_cmd_var_list_children and all the other error messages in MI have
> > it too.
>
> If other messages are marked up with _(), then this is okay. But I
> still think the const char [] strings should be defined once and used
> elsewhere in this function.
OK but this only makes sense if it is done consistently. So I offer to
do it for all of the MI error messages. I'll submit one example first.
> > > This text should refer to @var{print-values} you used inside
> > > @smallexample, otherwise it is not clear what should be used in its
> > > stead.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean here.
>
> The usage description used @var{print-values}, which is a variable
> parameter, but the text does not refer to @var{print-values}. A
> reader will not understand what to put instead of @var{print-values}
> if you don't mention it.
I think I follow that now.
> > > Also, I find the choice of "--all-values" unfortunate. The opposite
> > > of "--no-values" is something like "--with-values" or
> > > "--print-values", not "--all-values".
> >
> > If it was a CLI command I would agree but the exact syntax of MI commands
> > only has to be referred to by developers and not remembered by users.
>
> In this case, users==developers. Mnemonic names matter even for
> developers of GDB front ends.
>
> > I've used "--all-values" because, in the case of -var-list-children there
> > is a third possibility: "--simple-values" and, to me, it seems simpler to
> > have only three values for print_values (mi-cmds.h):
> >
> > enum print_values {
> > PRINT_NO_VALUES,
> > PRINT_ALL_VALUES,
> > PRINT_SIMPLE_VALUES
> > };
>
> I see the reason, but I think it is not important enough to use
> "--all-values". Anyway, the switch text does not need to be similar
> to the enum name, even if you use PRINT_ALL_VALUES in the enum.
OK. But again this only makes sense if I change -var-list-children too.
This wouldn't be backward compatible but I doubt that anyone is currently
relying on it. Is that acceptable?
Nick