From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11390 invoked by alias); 30 Oct 2013 09:01:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 11295 invoked by uid 89); 30 Oct 2013 09:00:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:00:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r9U90vwo001346 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 05:00:57 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-112-45.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.45]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9U90th2026924; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 05:00:56 -0400 Message-ID: <5270CAC7.5050607@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:01:00 -0000 From: Phil Muldoon MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [patch][python] Fix python/14513 References: <5239A7E9.8010202@redhat.com> <877gedub9p.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <523A0E4E.3090105@redhat.com> <8738p1uam6.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <524BE7B3.3030805@redhat.com> <87mwm2i8vi.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87mwm2i8vi.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00917.txt.bz2 On 21/10/13 22:58, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Phil" == Phil Muldoon writes: > > Phil> I am not sure what the resolution is here. At some point we have to > Phil> decide whether we have anything valid to print. We can hoist the > Phil> fprint into both of these branches, but even in the "else" clause we > Phil> have to check if we actually have anything as the fprint adds a > Phil> newline to the set documentation: > > Phil> fprintf_filtered (gdb_stdout, "%s\n", set_doc_string); > > Phil> What are your thoughts on this? > > I've been thinking about it more and I don't understand why we want to > print anything in the "set" command. > I think it's fine if we just don't call a method. > What do you think of that? I am fine with it, as long as you are. Cheers, Phil