[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gdb
Subject:    Re: / (slash) command : fast way to temporarily change setting(s) to run a command
From:       Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers () skynet ! be>
Date:       2019-05-03 9:10:02
Message-ID: 1556874602.1511.10.camel () skynet ! be
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, 2019-05-03 at 09:23 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > 
> > I like this rationale for the global / command.
> > 
> > I'd like to wait a bit longer before reviewing Philippe's patch, however.
> > I know that one of my colleagues has some thoughts on the interface
> > and I'd like to give him a little extra time to express them here...
> 
> That was me.  :-)  See here:
> 
>  https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-05/msg00002.html
> 
> I'll follow up when I have a chance.  Yesterday I fixed the
> regressions that Philippe pointed at (fixes already in the branch) -- I
> wanted to see if it was possible to get to a clean slate for better
> experimenting / better ground for discussion.
Thanks for this.
Note that  I have listed some points for the discussion in
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-05/msg00019.html

IMO, a (the?) major question I still have about keeping (or not) the "/"
patch is for options that have a 'wide' impact.
The "/" command avoids that this option has to be added as a specific
argument to all the commands that are impacted directly or indirectly.
An example is the new max-depth.
As far as I understand, max-depth will at least impact:
   backtrace
   print
   frame
   info args
   ...
(in fact all commands that are printing directly or indirectly
some variables).
With the "/" command, you have a way to influence all these commands.
Otherwise, as far as I understand, an option --max-depth has
to be added to all these commands.
(or the user has to do set/launch command/reset).

Philippe


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]