Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Provide the ability to write the frame unwinder in Python

[Doug Evans <dje@google.com>]

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Alexander Smundak <asmundak@google.com> wrote:
> IMHO we reached an agreement on API.
>
> I would really like the reviewers to express their opinions about the naming
> at this point. To summarize:
> * We need a name for the entity passed to a sniffer. This entity provides
> access to the registers of the frame being sniffed, and has factory methods
> to create instances returned by a sniffer.
> * We need a name for the entity returned by a sniffer.
> * Should the term 'sniffer' be used in the API and documentation describing
> implementing frame unwinding in GDB extensions?

I'm not sure I'm going to be of much help here.

I don't mind "sniffing" as the name of the act of deciding whether
a frame as recognized, and I do like "unwinder" as the name of
the object doing the sniffing. But then "sniffer" instead of
"unwinder" seems fine too.

Regarding the result of an unwinder/sniffer,
If I approach this from the point of view of what's
easy to explain, it feels like the result of an Unwinder
is a Frame.

Would it make sense to speak of an Unwinder taking
an EphemeralFrame as input and returning a Frame as output?