This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] -stack-select-frame
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 05:55:07PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote:
> > - You're changing the behavior of a command; do people use this
> > command? Are you confident that they will handle the new output
> > gracefully?
>
> I'm not aware of anyone using this command - I don't see how they currently
> could really. I think its less likely to break existing behaviour than this
> change:
>
> 2005-05-17 Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com>
> Dennis Brueni <dennis@slickedit.com>
>
> * stack.c (print_frame): In MI mode, output a fullname attribute
> with the stack frame.
>
> which must change the output for every frontend using MI.
My concern was that this added a new item to a response which previous
had zero. Why do you think people couldn't use it as is? Seems
perfectly usable to me; if you know the level of a frame you want to
select, then you probably already have the result of a backtrace which
includes a printout of the stack frame, so you probably don't need
another!
Could you explain why you think we need output here?
> I don't see how MI can evolve without changing its behaviour. If it is
> significantly different presumably a new level can be added as before.
That was my point: whether we needed to do that. I was just asking.
> > > ! ^done,frame=@{level="2",addr="0x000107a4",func="foo",
> > > ! file="recursive2.c",fullname="/home/foo/bar/devo/myproject/recursive2.c",line=line="14"@},
> >
> > The double line= is a typo, right?
>
> I've just copied it from another part of the manual. In the node
> "GDB/MI Command Description Format" it says:
>
> Manual> Note the the line breaks shown in the examples are here only for
> Manual> readability. They don't appear in the real output.
No, the bit that says "line=line="14"".
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC