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] |
Here is an updated patch. I have changed the options to be as follows. 'info threads [-a] [ id ... | -r regex ]' -a enables sorting by thread name -r regex matches regex with thread names. I have not changed the threads array to a VEC as of yet. At this point it seems like more trouble than it's worth. But I suppose it could be done if people think it's necessary. On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote: > > Sergio> Why not `-r regex'? I think it would be more clear. > > Me too. > > Sergio> Other commands (`sharedlibrary', `info variables', etc) take a regex as > Sergio> their first argument, without requiring a modifier like `-r'. If the > Sergio> "pipe" patch were already in, this alphabetical sorting would not be > Sergio> needed... Anyway, just thinking here. > > Piping is nice but I think it is also good to have options for common > cases. > > Sergio> I guess Tom did not suggest this because of performance per se, but > Sergio> rather because if you have to make a list in GDB then it is already a > Sergio> convention to use VEC for these things. > > Yeah. I thought it would make the code simpler. > > Tom
Attachment:
thread_sorting_regex_with-a-r-options.patch
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |