From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6048 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2010 17:09:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 6039 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jul 2010 17:09:01 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:08:57 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L4W0000023J7K00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 20:08:55 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.12.240]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L4W00HVS2AT9GF0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 20:08:55 +0300 (IDT) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:09:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: add a few index entries (Re: Static tracepoints support) In-reply-to: <201007011515.11282.pedro@codesourcery.com> To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83ocer9lga.fsf@gnu.org> References: <201006251931.57860.pedro@codesourcery.com> <83tyoqcc8i.fsf@gnu.org> <201006281326.39820.pedro@codesourcery.com> <201007011515.11282.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg00020.txt.bz2 > From: Pedro Alves > Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:15:10 +0100 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii > > On Monday 28 June 2010 13:26:38, Pedro Alves wrote: > > > > +@cindex set static tracepoint > > > > > > This index entry would be much more efficient if it did not start with > > > "set". For example, > > > > > > @cindex static tracepoint, setting > > > > Agreed. I see the same could be done to set fast tracepoint. I'll > > see about auditing that and others after this patch is in. > > Can't say I see that much consistency, but, reading the generated > index, these appear to me to increase usefulness. Okay? Yes, thanks.