From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DACB03857C51 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 19:23:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org DACB03857C51 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [217.28.27.60]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7809F1E0CB; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 14:23:59 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1669663439; bh=EIU+kC1129rP8T3gzZ3q+EzI9fqTWM+iWBXdELu0LRk=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=Whc/G6Mci66W5oJXUrEobWZVkK8AArlsEDsXqr9os/6s1NrpkSFmPk1kVnqb+UxR9 W5GiFzhDzuB9ftg1Ew0korCy9JVXxF5c60Bg+FkIZnB8C42Ff52gouc9laQcEpvCGz zfOVqmkhTFGIPeMM8n+Q1zCjOmcEIMBHceZ9we5I= Message-ID: <9411d46c-14b5-1e12-08d7-2732b1d52750@simark.ca> Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 14:23:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Don't let gdb_stdlog use pager Content-Language: en-US To: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20221117182904.1291713-1-tromey@adacore.com> <20221117182904.1291713-4-tromey@adacore.com> From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: <20221117182904.1291713-4-tromey@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: > diff --git a/gdb/cli/cli-interp.h b/gdb/cli/cli-interp.h > index fa007d78621..978e7f291e4 100644 > --- a/gdb/cli/cli-interp.h > +++ b/gdb/cli/cli-interp.h > @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ class cli_interp_base : public interp > ui_file *targ; > ui_file *targerr; > ui_file_up tee_to_delete; > + ui_file_up stderr_to_delete; > ui_file_up file_to_delete; > ui_file_up log_to_delete; I think it would help me understand if the naming of these fields was a bit better. I think the to_delete suffixes are no longer relevant since using ui_file_up, the types tell us about the ownership. And I think that "tee_to_delete" could be named "stdout_tee", and "stderr_to_delete" could be named "stderr_tee". Not terribly important, perhaps as a follow up. Simon