This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Eliminate deprecated_show_value_hack from remote.c
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 16:59:43 -0400
Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:55:37PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> > The patch below eliminates all calls to deprecated_show_value_hack()
> > from remote.c.
> >
> > I considered adding the fprint_filtered() statement which is now in
> > the new show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd() to show_packet_config_cmd(),
> > but I found one other call to this latter function which didn't also
> > want/need the value printed. This is why I created a brand new
> > function.
> >
> > Comments?
>
> > + fprintf_filtered (file,
> > + _("Current use of remote protocol `%s' (%s) is %s.\n"),
> > + config->name, config->title, value);
>
> Do you need the word "packet" here? It looks like name will be simply
> 'p'. Otherwise, thank you for doing this!
Yes. Good catch!
FWIW, I made this mistake by copying the message from the following
line in add_packet_config_cmd():
print = xstrprintf ("Current use of remote protocol `%s' (%s) is %%s",
But it turns out that this variable is no longer used. It was
introduced sometime last summer and its use was eliminated in
February of this year. It's not clear to me if it was ever actually
printed. I'll prepare a separate patch to eliminate some of the cruft
from add_packet_config_cmd().
Here's an update to my recently posted patch. The only difference
between it and my earlier patch is the addition of the word "packet"
to the message printed by show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd().
* remote.c (show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd): New function.
(show_remote_protocol_vcont_packet_cmd )
(show_remote_protocol_qSymbol_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_P_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_Z_software_bp_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_Z_hardware_bp_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_Z_write_wp_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_Z_read_wp_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_Z_access_wp_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_binary_download_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_qPart_auxv_packet_cmd)
(show_remote_protocol_p_packet_cmd ): Replace calls to
deprecated_show_value_hack() and show_packet_config_cmd()
with single call to show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd().
Index: remote.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/remote.c,v
retrieving revision 1.179
diff -u -p -r1.179 remote.c
--- remote.c 25 Mar 2005 20:39:45 -0000 1.179
+++ remote.c 6 Apr 2005 21:32:01 -0000
@@ -675,6 +675,18 @@ add_packet_config_cmd (struct packet_con
}
}
+static void
+show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (struct ui_file *file, int from_tty,
+ struct cmd_list_element *c,
+ const char *value,
+ struct packet_config *config)
+{
+ fprintf_filtered (file,
+ _("Current use of remote protocol `%s' (%s) packet is %s.\n"),
+ config->name, config->title, value);
+ show_packet_config_cmd (config);
+}
+
static enum packet_result
packet_ok (const char *buf, struct packet_config *config)
{
@@ -754,8 +766,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_vcont_packet_cmd (s
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_vcont);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_vcont);
}
/* Should we try the 'qSymbol' (target symbol lookup service) request? */
@@ -773,8 +785,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_qSymbol_packet_cmd
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_qSymbol);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_qSymbol);
}
/* Should we try the 'P' (set register) request? */
@@ -793,8 +805,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_P_packet_cmd (struc
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_P);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_P);
}
/* Should we try one of the 'Z' requests? */
@@ -826,8 +838,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_Z_software_bp_packe
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_SOFTWARE_BP]);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_SOFTWARE_BP]);
}
static void
@@ -842,8 +854,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_Z_hardware_bp_packe
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_HARDWARE_BP]);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_HARDWARE_BP]);
}
static void
@@ -858,8 +870,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_Z_write_wp_packet_c
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_WRITE_WP]);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_WRITE_WP]);
}
static void
@@ -874,8 +886,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_Z_read_wp_packet_cm
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_READ_WP]);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_READ_WP]);
}
static void
@@ -890,8 +902,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_Z_access_wp_packet_
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_ACCESS_WP]);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_Z[Z_PACKET_ACCESS_WP]);
}
/* For compatibility with older distributions. Provide a ``set remote
@@ -959,8 +971,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_binary_download_cmd
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_binary_download);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_binary_download);
}
/* Should we try the 'qPart:auxv' (target auxiliary vector read) request? */
@@ -978,8 +990,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_qPart_auxv_packet_c
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_qPart_auxv);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_qPart_auxv);
}
static struct packet_config remote_protocol_p;
@@ -996,8 +1008,8 @@ show_remote_protocol_p_packet_cmd (struc
struct cmd_list_element *c,
const char *value)
{
- deprecated_show_value_hack (file, from_tty, c, value);
- show_packet_config_cmd (&remote_protocol_p);
+ show_remote_protocol_packet_cmd (file, from_tty, c, value,
+ &remote_protocol_p);
}