From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19780 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2004 03:21:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 19770 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2004 03:21:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.108) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Apr 2004 03:21:13 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 9CEF047D63; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 20:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 03:44:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Proposal: New command "begin" Message-ID: <20040416032113.GC1131@gnat.com> References: <20040401203716.GX888@gnat.com> <407323E3.6010801@gnu.org> <20040407074018.GX871@gnat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040407074018.GX871@gnat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00088.txt.bz2 > > I'm just not sure about "begin" as a good choice of command name - > > begin goes better with end, and that's a compound command terminator. > > I like "begin", but I'm not that attached to this name. If we can agree > on a better command name, I'll take care of sending an implementation > plan on gdb-patches. Any suggestion for a better command name, instead of "begin"? -- Joel