This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] gdb: Change how frames are selected for 'frame' and 'info frame'.
- From: Philippe Waroquiers <philippe dot waroquiers at skynet dot be>
- To: Andrew Burgess <andrew dot burgess at embecosm dot com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 23:15:16 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] gdb: Change how frames are selected for 'frame' and 'info frame'.
- References: <cover.1525797846.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <cover.1525797846.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <63020671a997f926cd747677cd4e614e51e81f8d.1525797846.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <83k1sanw3t.fsf@gnu.org> <20180521115357.GS3797@embecosm.com> <83y3gddl5q.fsf@gnu.org> <20180605185318.GE15881@embecosm.com>
On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 19:53 +0100, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> > If we do need a keyword, how about "frame add"?
>
> Personally, I think 'add' is worse than 'create' - what's the frame
> being added too? But I do acknowledge that 'create' is not ideal
> either.
>
> I wonder if 'new' is better than 'create', maybe implies less "making
> something in the inferior"? Or how about, 'for' instead, like this:
>
> (gdb) frame for STACK-ADDR PC-ADDR
If nothing is added or created or ...,
maybe you could also use one of:
(gdb) frame interpret STACK-ADDR PC-ADDR
or
(gdb) frame look STACK-ADDR PC-ADDR
or
(gdb) frame view STACK-ADDR PC-ADDR
?
Philippe