From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 115533 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2015 08:04:08 -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 115516 invoked by uid 89); 19 Mar 2015 08:04:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: sasl.smtp.pobox.com Received: from pb-sasl1.int.icgroup.com (HELO sasl.smtp.pobox.com) (208.72.237.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 08:04:05 +0000 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA4238377; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 04:04:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pb-sasl1.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8B938376; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 04:04:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rusty (unknown [88.160.190.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D0D938375; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 04:04:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Andy Wingo To: Doug Evans Cc: gdb-patches , guile-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Provide the ability to write the frame unwinder in Python References: <21714.40641.510825.30998@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> <54E71694.1080304@redhat.com> <87ioei31uj.fsf@igalia.com> <87d24p19tt.fsf@igalia.com> <54FD7DAA.7010603@redhat.com> <87twxrncld.fsf@igalia.com> <87ioe1dvu2.fsf@igalia.com> <87sid4atms.fsf@igalia.com> <87mw3aadjv.fsf@igalia.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 08:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Doug Evans's message of "Wed, 18 Mar 2015 09:48:32 -0700") Message-ID: <87k2yd8lcg.fsf@igalia.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 8171E4B0-CE0E-11E4-B7C8-EA766A2A9587-02397024!pb-sasl1.pobox.com X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00575.txt.bz2 Hi :) On Wed 18 Mar 2015 17:48, Doug Evans writes: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Andy Wingo wrote: >> >> On Tue 17 Mar 2015 23:21, Doug Evans writes: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Andy Wingo wrote: >>>>> As to the class of an object passed to a sniffer, how about calling it >>>>> FrameData? Note that it's not very important from the user's point of >>>>> view as sniffer code does not ever reference it by name. >>>> >>>> It's true that from user code it barely matters to Python, but Scheme's >>>> monomorphic flavor makes these things more apparent: >>>> >>>> (frame-data-read-register frame "r0") >>>> >>>> This doesn't read so well to me -- is it "read-register" on a >>>> "frame-data", or is it "data-read-register" on a "frame" ? A weak point >>>> but "ephemeral-frame-read-register" avoids the question. >>> >>> As food for discussion, >>> I know some people use foo:bar in Scheme to separate >>> the object "foo" from the operation on it "bar". >>> -> frame-data:read-register >> >> This convention is not often used in Guile. When it is used, it often >> denotes field access rather than some more involved procedure call -- >> similar to the lowercase "foo_bar()" versus camel-cased "FooBar()" in >> Google C++ guidelines. >> >>> I like having some separator, but I went with what >>> I thought was the preferred spelling (all -'s). >>> It's not too late to change gdb/guile to use foo:bar throughout (IMO), >>> but the door is closing. >> >> FWIW, I prefer "-". > > Even though a different character solves a problem? > What problem does it introduce? I find it to be uncommon style in Guile and so it doesn't appeal to me. YMMV. Of course, what appeals to me is a function of what is common, and I'm sure anything can work well as long as it's consistent. Adding a convention for using colons also makes me wonder when to use colons or dashes. Perhaps that is my real objection. Note that actually my original concern was not valid in this case; "frame-data-read-register" is unlikely to be misread, because people tend to break the name at the verb, if present. "read-register" on a "frame-data". > The comparison with _ vs CamelCase is apples and oranges. At least in V8 there is a similarity; there are two conventions for writing method names: underscores if it's a simple field access or camel-case for more complicated things. Same decision criteria as colon versus dash, as I understand the convention. You don't have the subject/verb punctuation problem but you do have different ways to write the verb based on what's going on underneath. Doug if you want a specific coding style do let me know and I'm happy to change. Please consider these comments to be just gut reactions / reflections. Andy