From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15D393858401 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 11:43:16 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 15D393858401 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37384) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nokkJ-00016Z-N3; Wed, 11 May 2022 07:43:11 -0400 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2667 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nokkH-0001eJ-ED; Wed, 11 May 2022 07:43:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 14:43:11 +0300 Message-Id: <8335hgs3ap.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: "Willgerodt, Felix" Cc: markus.t.metzger@intel.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: (felix.willgerodt@intel.com) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/10] python: Add clear() to gdb.Record. References: <20220506114010.134106-1-felix.willgerodt@intel.com> <20220506114010.134106-6-felix.willgerodt@intel.com> <83a6bu282n.fsf@gnu.org> <83tu9xscua.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 11:43:17 -0000 > From: "Willgerodt, Felix" > CC: "Metzger, Markus T" , > "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" > Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 08:22:05 +0000 > > > > > If this is described in > > > > another place in the manual, could you add a cross-reference to that > > > > place? > > > > > > > > > > I don't think it has been described yet, as clear() hasn't directly been > > exposed > > > before, only indirectly e.g. via "record stop". The "trace" is however > > > mentioned e.g. here for "record btrace pt": > > > https://sourceware.org/gdb/onlinedocs/gdb/Process-Record-and- > > Replay.html > > > > > > Should I link that? > > > > Yes, I think so. > > I added it locally. Then I saw that this chapter at the top, a couple of > lines above already links it. In my eyes this makes the extra link here > redundant. Should I still add it? No need, thanks.