This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC/RFA?] Should break FILE:LINENO skip prologue?


> > > -For example: in C, this is the line with the open brace.
> > > +For example, in C, this is the line with the open brace.
> > 
> > This is actually not true. It's usually the first line of code
> > past the open brace.
> 
> You seem to be thinking about source code formatted according to GNU
> coding standards ;-) But C allows code to appear on the same line as
> the open brace, so it's not simple to say this with absolute accuracy.

I agree that we can't always be accurate.

> I think on balance, the current wording is not bad: after all, why
> should a GDB user care whether the brace itself does or does not
> generate executable code?

I agree that a typical user doesn't care, but I disagree that the
current wording is OK. In the vast majority of the C code that
I have seen, except in one-liner functions, people didn't write code
on the same line as the opening brace. So the sentence will be false
most of the time (in my case).

I suggest we just delete this sentence altogether. Or, maybe what
we can do is use an actual example where we can use the formatting
we want.

> How about if I say that the extension is in addition to the ``normal''
> expression syntax?  Like this:
> 
>   Here @var{address} may be any expression valid in the current working
>   language (@pxref{Languages, working language}) that specifies a code
>   address.  In addition, as a convenience, @value{GDBN} extends the
>   semantics of expressions...

Sure, it is clearer.

-- 
Joel


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]