This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA 5/5] Explicit linespecs - documentation
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: keiths at redhat dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:47:10 +0300
- Subject: Re: [RFA 5/5] Explicit linespecs - documentation
- References: <50120FE7.8060100@redhat.com> <83394djvm1.fsf@gnu.org> <50190306.7080500@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 11:20:54 +0100
> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
> CC: Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>
> On 07/27/2012 12:23 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > This is too implementation oriented, and thus not really appropriate
> > for the user manual. The text should:
> >
> > . explain what is an explicit spec, in a way that clarifies why it
> > is called "explicit" (so that users could make a mental note of
> > that, which will facilitate remembering the terminology);
>
> Or maybe (shocking suggestion follows), not even calling
> "explicit linespecs" "linespecs" at all. IOW, you either use linespecs,
> or explicit locations.
Not shocking at all, at least not for me. I could go with "explicit
locations". We still need to say at least something to explain what's
the "explicit" part doing there.