This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] Fix "set" handling of Python parameters
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Tom Tromey <tom at tromey dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 09:42:21 +0300
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix "set" handling of Python parameters
- References: <20180426225140.18640-1-tom@tromey.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> From: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
> Cc: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 16:51:40 -0600
>
> +* Python API
> +
> + ** A gdb.Parameter will no longer print the "set" help text on an
> + ordinary "set"; instead by default a "set" will be silent unless
> + the get_set_string method returns a non-empty string.
The code mentions compatibility with GDB < 7.3, so shouldn't NEWS at
least indicate that this breaks that compatibility?
> +If this method exists, @value{GDBN} will call it when a
> +@var{parameter}'s value has been changed via the @code{set} API (for
> +example, @kbd{set foo off}). The @code{value} attribute has already
> +been populated with the new value and may be used in output. This
> +method must return a string. If the returned string is not empty,
> +@value{GDBN} will present it to the user.
So there's no way for a Python extension to display an empty string,
even if it wants to do that?
Anyway, the documentation parts are approved. Thanks.