This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: is systemtap's language more complicated than needed.


James Dickens wrote:

[snip]

Perhaps, though we would be saving just two tokens ("." and "function"
/ "statement" / ...) for each such shorthand use.  Or one could save
typing effort by supporting explicit abbreviations like "k.stmt(...)"
for "kernel.statement(...)".


and make the thing even harder to read? I hope this isn't the case. I
started this thread because of readability not the length of the
files.

while we are talking about shortening things I did see one other
change to the language, currently  there is  kernel.syscall  probes
this should be shortened to syscall because there won't be userland
syscalls we will be monitoring correct?

Although we wont be monitoring syscalls in the application systemcall tapset is correct in referring to kernel.syscall rather than just syscall to maintain consistency in the syntax. In other words all things in the kernel have kernel prefix even if they are unique.



James


'


- FChE





Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]