Re: -var-show-attributes response syntax

[Nick Roberts <nickrob at snap dot net dot nz>]

Vladimir Prus writes:
 > 
 > Hello!
 > 
 > Here's the docs for -var-show-attributes MI command:
 > 
 >        Synopsis 
 >             -var-show-attributes name
 > 
 >           List attributes of the specified variable object name: 
 >              status=attr [ ( ,attr )* ]
 >              where attr is { { editable | noneditable } | TBD }.
 > 
 > What is the reason for using "non" instead of "attribute_name=attribute_value" 
 > syntax? The above assumes all attributes are boolean, which is not very 
 > extensible.

I think the above means output may be something like:

^done,attr={"editable","yellow","big"}

(Perhaps { a | b } should be documented in "Notation and Terminology".)

Currently it appears that attr="noneditable" for constant types and
attr="editable" otherwise.  I don't know what other attributes the authors
had in mind (long?, volatile?, local?, static?).

 > How about changing the above to "editable=0/1"? 

I see no advantage in restricting the output but I've not used this command.
How do you want to use it?

 >                                                 This sounds like breaking 
 > backward compatibility, but probably is not, because "editable" is broken 
 > itself:
 > 
 >      -var-create C * 1+1
 >      ^done,name="C",numchild="0",type="long"
 >      (gdb)
 >      -var-show-attributes C
 >      ^done,attr="editable"
 >      (gdb)

Why do you think this is broken?

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob