This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Python pretty-printing [5/6]
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:37:24 +0300
- Subject: Re: Python pretty-printing [5/6]
- References: <m38wmibwq0.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <m3iqlews5z.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 19:07:52 -0600
>
> Here is the new version of this patch.
>
> I think I have addressed all the comments; either by making the
> requested change or explaining why I did not. Still, you probably
> should check.
Thanks. I have 2 minor comments:
> +We recommend that you put your core pretty-printers into a Python
> +package. If your pretty-printers are for use with a library, we
> +further recommend embedding a version number into the package name.
> +This practice will enable @value{GDBN} to load multiple versions of
> +your pretty-printers at the same time.
I couldn't quite understand the importance of the version numbers, and
how that would allow GDB to have multiple versions of the same
pretty-printer. I asked myself how the ``right'' version will be
selected in that case. Is the way this works documented somewhere
else? if so, a cross-reference here would be good. If not, I think we
need to say a few words about that.
> +You should write auto-loaded code such that it can be evaluated
> +multiple times without changing its meaning.
Here, I suggest a cross-reference to where auto-loading is described.
Otherwise, this patch for the manual is fine with me.