This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: Better handling of arguments/literals from the command-line?
- From: fche at redhat dot com (Frank Ch. Eigler)
- To: "Stone, Joshua I" <joshua dot i dot stone at intel dot com>
- Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso at mit dot edu>, "systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com" <systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 08:04:59 -0400
- Subject: Re: Better handling of arguments/literals from the command-line?
- References: <E1KmL7X-0000cI-6Y@closure.thunk.org> <20081006200135.GA2351@jistone-exdc.sc.intel.com>
"Stone, Joshua I" <joshua.i.stone@intel.com> writes:
> [...]
> For parameters that are only used as literals in function/probe bodies,
> we could probably synthesize this global-as-parameter method implicitly.
> We could internally translate this:
>
> probe begin { println(@1, $2) }
>
> into this:
>
> global __string_arg1 = ""
> global __long_arg2 = 0
> probe begin { println(__string_arg1, __long_arg2) }
Not quite - the $num parameter series constitute pasted token
sequences, not simple numbers any more.
- FChE