Re: [patch][python] 2 of 5 - Frame filter MI code changes.

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Phil" == Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com> writes:

Phil> +
Phil> +static int
Phil> +parse_no_frames_option (char *arg)

Needs an intro comment.  'arg' should be const.

Phil> +  if (arg && (strcmp (arg, "--no-frame-filters") == 0))

We recently decided to use explicit NULL checks, like 'arg != NULL'.

Phil> +  /* Parse arguments.  In this instance we are just looking for
Phil> +     --no-frame-filters.  */
Phil> +  while (1)
Phil> +    {
Phil> +      int oind = 0;
Phil> +      char *oarg;
Phil> +      int opt = mi_getopt ("-stack-list-frames", argc, argv,
Phil> +			   opts, &oind, &oarg);

I don't think it is correct to set oind in the loop.
It may work now but it will be wrong if we ever add more options.

Phil> +  if ((argc > 3 && ! raw_arg) || (argc == 1 && ! raw_arg)
Phil> +      || (argc == 2 && raw_arg))
Phil> +    error (_("-stack-list-frames: Usage: [--no-frame-filters] [FRAME_LOW FRAME_HIGH]"));

This code should use oind and not check raw_arg.  Actually the rest of
the function should use oind to index into argv.

Phil> +      /* We cannot pass -1 to frame_low, as that would signify a
Phil> +      relative backtrace from the tail of the stack.  So, in the case
Phil> +      of frame_low == -1, assign and increment it.  */
Phil> +      if (py_frame_low == -1)
Phil> +	py_frame_low++;

I didn't check, but I assume it is ok for frame_high==-1 in the call?

Phil> +  /* Run the inbuilt backtrace if there are no filters registered, or
Phil> +     if there was an error in the Python backtracing output, or if
Phil> +     frame-filters are disabled.  */
Phil> +  if (! frame_filters || raw_arg || result == PY_BT_ERROR
Phil> +      || result == PY_BT_NO_FILTERS)

It seems to me that the PY_BT_ERROR case should not be here, since the
MI client could get a partially filtered trace followed by the normal
trace.

'result' is initialized to 0 but it seems like it should be initialized
to some PY_BT_ enum value; and have the right type.

Phil> +    error (_("-stack-list-locals: Usage: [--no-frame-filters] PRINT_VALUES"));

I think -stack-list-frames takes "-no-frame-filters" but this and others
take the "--" form.  That seems confusing.

Phil> +       result = apply_frame_filter (frame, flags, print_value,
Phil> +				    current_uiout, 0,0);

Missing space after the ",".

Phil> +   if (! frame_filters || raw_arg || result == PY_BT_ERROR
Phil> +       || result == PY_BT_NO_FILTERS)
Phil> +     {
Phil> +       list_args_or_locals (locals, print_value, frame);

Same comments about PY_BT_ERROR and 'result'.
Actually this applies everywhere.

Tom