This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] New substitute-path commands
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:41:23 -0400
- Subject: Re: [RFA] New substitute-path commands
- References: <email@example.com> <20060707191203.GD971@adacore.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20060710054027.GF971@adacore.com> <email@example.com> <20060710214706.GA2390@adacore.com> <20060710215114.GA31444@nevyn.them.org> <20060710215630.GB2390@adacore.com> <20060710215839.GA31772@nevyn.them.org> <20060713212746.GA1519@adacore.com>
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 02:27:46PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> My question is the following: When you enter a second rule, should it
> take precedence over the first one you entered? More generally, should
> the substitution rules entered last be used first, or the opposite?
Good question. I'm strongly in favor of intelligent users picking
rules where it doesn't make a difference! :-)
> I'm 50-50 on this:
> . With first-entered/first-used, you enter the rules following the
> logic "if blah, then replace with [...]; else if bloh, then replace
> with [...]; else if [...], then [...]". In other words, you enter
> the rules in the same order you would write a "program". It seems
> pretty natural.
> . With last-entered/first-used, it's possible to override previous
> entries without having to delete the previous rules. Not so natural
> to "program", though.
> Actually, as I'm writing this, I now favor first-entered/first-used.
> One can delete a rule if he wants to override it. It's marginal anyway.
> What do you guys think?
I think that's fine.
Let's not overdesign this. I was only half-kidding about calling a
Python function to transform the source pathnames if you want to do
anything more complicated - if someone comes up with a legitimate use
for anything more complex than a simple list of prefixes, we can do
something along those lines.