This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 5/9] Rename "gsmob" in Guile interface to "gdb object"
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Andy Wingo <wingo at igalia dot com>
- Cc: xdje42 at gmail dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:46:31 +0300
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] Rename "gsmob" in Guile interface to "gdb object"
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1397060028-18158-1-git-send-email-wingo at igalia dot com> <1397060028-18158-6-git-send-email-wingo at igalia dot com> <m361metmh4 dot fsf at sspiff dot org> <87ioq8s3a4 dot fsf at igalia dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> From: Andy Wingo <wingo@igalia.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:39:47 +0200
>
> >> +The values exposed by @value{GDBN} to Guile are known as
> >> +@dfn{@value{GDBN} objects}. There are several kinds of @value{GDBN}
> >> +object, and each is disjoint from all other types known to Guile.
> >
> > objects
>
> You sure?
I think Doug is right, although what you wrote is not entirely wrong,
either.
> "There are several kinds of GDB object, and..." sounds better
> to me than "There are several kinds of GDB objects, and...". Maybe it
> would be better to restructure the sentence; I tried a few other
> formulations and all sounded worse.
How about this:
@value{GDBN} objects can be of several distinct types; each type is
different from any other type known to Guile.