From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10459 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2013 23:24:45 -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 10449 invoked by uid 89); 6 Dec 2013 23:24:44 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-ea0-f179.google.com Received: from Unknown (HELO mail-ea0-f179.google.com) (209.85.215.179) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 23:24:44 +0000 Received: by mail-ea0-f179.google.com with SMTP id r15so571132ead.38 for ; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 15:24:34 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=qVuhd0uK9zr0IcEcRDa4RLhtcvuLG/Lsteic9vP8dgI=; b=OBKEkKHfcfRADgEjHTMCorHxLiJRl1Pso6VewxKwDyGx/zD6jZp9iw8kDP/TPWzcQ5 4iSHNLiNJJaviVnzW/DZkojrDOls0KLjuYVn/xxCLTAJdXghWvfDjot5jA+c5CLo6z+a j2hmduN6lZ+zLWqWh7CtIOztaFUkUZ8RbzFscCf90fATDKCQ/A281272xxt33On1y7jv CxX6ERvERKbyzP2KoUjhHsybER0HHifPAWnmRVibieRCmiWHWGrLFstnDrlOW9dN8N4o K2KAq3VDEiF5OTpRTPfdJUVshPsBsu8qxx2LvuOTvMPbzPZqFj+G4PoRh1TfZ0TowkpJ GIXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm5Zxf2fHUpgvRhuzJm1VvgcJwK5x6kYLuKU7Rw0xAIgeFKRoNlmEqHXJTAhcZTjGI3yr1Bq7TrX1EaoQHpTItecq3kFaJpxloZiWE3AZcSSwjkhNrhrEz8ddA0gHsu6SOSXi4a6glZJJmnVNyAJYFRQ1D8RySpsoyG8WNmkWpr5mmGfkoNgdYXC/lon4ovp36NHgHaccwh/PBhFCau1Tau1yRoRQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.14.3.130 with SMTP id 2mr4334429eeh.36.1386372274589; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 15:24:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.14.151.72 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 15:24:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 23:24:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Debug Methods in GDB Python From: Siva Chandra To: Doug Evans Cc: gdb-patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg00276.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Doug Evans wrote: > Sorry for the delay. > I've been wanting to find time to investigate some of the suggestions I made. > e.g., instead of DEFAULT_DEBUG_METHOD_GROUP, etc. > have the grouping work the same way it does for the libstdc++ > pretty-printers. Have you thought about it? I have removed DEFAULT_DEBUG_METHOD_GROUP from the code in my latest patch. However, there is one reference to it in the brief (really brief!) doc change I have in the patch [1]. About grouping in libstdc++, is it not doing a grouping within what is facilitated by the pretty printing API? For debug methods, I have added grouping wrt obj file, progspace, and global. I have not implemented the notion of sub debug methods (pretty printing API allows the user to bring in a notion of sub printers). There are two reason for this. 1. It is a convenience facility for the user which can be added easily if the base API is agreed upon. 2. This is a personal reason, which you could override: In the pretty printers world, each class would typically have only one pretty printer implementation. For debug methods though, each class could possibly have multiple debug methods. In which case, having a notion of sub debug methods is probably more meaningful at the class level. That is, it is more meaningful to have a "debug methods of a class" grouping. And, this grouping can be easily achieved by a debug method naming convention. [1] I am really scared to write a full doc entry if the base API is not agreed upon yet. Thanks, Siva Chandra