Re: [RFA] candidates for ambiguous command in upper case

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 01/10/2017 03:28 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> On 2017-01-10 10:19, Jerome Guitton wrote:
>> Yao Qi (qiyaoltc@gmail.com):
>>
>>> IMO, there is nothing wrong.  There is no command starts from "EX".
>>
>> This is a bit weird to accept upper-case EXEC-FIL then... isn't it?
>>
>> (gdb) exec-fil
>> No executable file now.
>> (gdb) EXEC-FIL
>> No executable file now.
> 
> I agree that if GDB accepts commands in upper case, the ambiguous
> command message should work accordingly.

Agreed.  I thought that the manual mentioned that gdb accepts
commands in either case, but I can't find it now.

> The message as it is, with an empty list, doesn't make sense.
> 
> I also noticed that tab completion was case sensitive, should that be
> fixed as well?
> 
> For example,
> 
>   (gdb) inf<tab><tab>
> 
> shows "inferior  info", but
> 
>   (gdb) INF<tab><tab>
> 
> shows nothing.  Should it show "inferior  info", or "INFERIOR INFO"?

I think the former.  I.e., show the canonical lowercase.  That
is likely to end up much easier and saner to implement.

I've been playing with completion recently [1], and I've noticed
that

 (gdb) handle sigu<tab>

completes to:

 (gdb) handle SIGU<bell>

 (gdb) handle sig<tab>

Or really:

 (gdb) handle sigu M-?
 SIGURG   SIGUSR1  SIGUSR2  

In my branch I've completely changed how GDB hands over
completion matches to readline, and I've had to make
sure to preserve that behavior, as caught by some test.

[1] - this WIP branch gets rid of the need to quote
      linespecs as in "b 'function(int<tab>" among other things:

  https://github.com/palves/gdb/commits/palves/cp-linespec

Thanks,
Pedro Alves