This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Letters reserved for future use
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 01:09:34AM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote:
> On 11/14/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:
> > A reserved "long command" prefix that isn't in the query namespace
> > might help aesthetically, but would offer no technical value.
>
> Isn't that what 'v' is allegedly for?
Oh yeah, forgot about that. We could document the vendor prefix for
'v' too.
> The whole thing about using organizational names in packet formats, as
> recommended for the query packets, seems a bit like overengineering.
> If we're responsive, it should be enough for people to simply post
> here saying that they've defined a 'u' packet that does thus-and-so.
> Even if we don't like the packet, we can at least act as an ad-hoc
> "assigned numbers authority" and note that it's been used somewhere.
Except then they have to synchronize with us about their uber-sekrit
ports. I think the vendor prefixes are a good idea.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC