On 8/27/21 5:09 PM, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2021-08-27 9:35 a.m., Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>>> "Tom" == Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
>>
>> Tom> +    #   arange [-c <comment>] [<segment selector>] <start> <length>
>> Tom> +    #     -- adds an address range.
>>
>> I wonder if there's a way to make this more tcl-ish, say by rearranging
>> the order of arguments so that things can be defaulted.  I think the
>> "args"-parsing style should normally be a last resort.
> 
> I personally don't like this style
> 
>     proc arange { arange_start arange_length {comment ""} {seg_sel ""} }
> 
> ... because if you want to specify the last parameter, you need to give
> all the other optional ones before.
> 
> I also agree that just having:
> 
>     proc arange { args }
> 
> is not great, since we have to do the argument parsing by hand, and it's
> a bit opaque what the proc accepts.  Could we consistently use the
> "options" pattern, such as the one used by aranges and cu?
> 
>    proc arange { options arange_start arange_length }
> 
> The callers would look like:
> 
>     arange {} $start $length
>     arange {
>        comment $comment
>        seg_sel $seg_sel
>     } $start $length
> 
> I think that's a good compromise.  I could re-do the rnglists procs this
> way, if you'd like.
> 

This patch implements that approach, using a new proc parse_options
similar to parse_args.

WDYT?

Thanks,
- Tom