From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31848 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2005 11:15:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 31836 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Nov 2005 11:15:16 -0000 Received: from lon-del-01.spheriq.net (HELO lon-del-01.spheriq.net) (195.46.50.97) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:15:16 +0000 Received: from lon-out-03.spheriq.net ([195.46.50.131]) by lon-del-01.spheriq.net with ESMTP id jA9BExok018043 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:14:59 GMT Received: from lon-cus-02.spheriq.net (lon-cus-02.spheriq.net [195.46.50.38]) by lon-out-03.spheriq.net with ESMTP id jA9BEwZe019114 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:14:59 GMT Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by lon-cus-02.spheriq.net with ESMTP id jA9BEu8e009403 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK); Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:14:58 GMT Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 36E39DA4A; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:14:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics, from userid 60012) id A897A477BA; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:17:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 6468C75999; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:17:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail1.bri.st.com (mail1.bri.st.com [164.129.8.218]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id AB7B2477B5; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:17:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [164.129.15.13] (terrorhawk.bri.st.com [164.129.15.13]) by mail1.bri.st.com (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id CGN03035 (AUTH "andrew stubbs"); Wed, 9 Nov 2005 11:14:54 GMT Message-ID: <4371D9A6.40109@st.com> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:15:00 -0000 From: Andrew STUBBS User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: $argc variable References: <436A0BD2.5080505@st.com> <20051107001800.GF19200@nevyn.them.org> <436F35E9.4070808@st.com> <20051107133538.GA2331@nevyn.them.org> <43709E94.4070004@st.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-O-Spoofed: Not Scanned X-O-General-Status: No X-O-Spam1-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Spam2-Status: Not Scanned X-O-URL-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Virus1-Status: No X-O-Virus2-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Virus3-Status: No X-O-Virus4-Status: No X-O-Virus5-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Image-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Attach-Status: Not Scanned X-SpheriQ-Ver: 4.1.07 X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Btw, Andrew, why do you post patches to gdb@sources.redhat.com, rather > than to gdb-patches@ ? The latter is the right place. I post patches to gdb-patches@ and other messages to gdb@ which, in this case, has a patch as a follow up. Should I switch list as soon as I have a patch? That seems a little disconnected to me, but I see your point. I originally posted the new options I had to gdb@ because I thought they might be a little more controversial - I also called them RFC. >>In the documentation I changed a '@var' to '@code' because @var makes it >>upper case in the info and I thought that misleading. > > > Upper case is not the problem: makeinfo produces an uppercase word > from @var since time immemoriam, so anyone who's used to read Info > manuals is already used to that. I would respectfully suggest that manuals should be written for those that do NOT know what they are doing. However, as you say, using upper-case for non-literal text is fine and I understand that and if users try to type it then there are bigger problems than case. > The problem here is that it's simply wrong to use @var in this case, > because $arg0 etc. are literal strings, to be used verbatim in the > actual script, not placeholders that stand for something else. So > your change is correct, although for the wrong reasons. ;-) Well, I would have been happy with the wrong mark-up if the end type-face had been right - it just depends on your point of view ;) >>-via @var{$arg0@dots{}$arg9}. A trivial example: > > > However, there _is_ something wrong here: the $ part should be outside > @var, since it's a literal character: > > via @code{$@var{arg0}@dots{}$@var{arg9}}. Err, haven't you just put back the @var, and therefore upper case, that we just agreed shouldn't be there? >>+via @code{$arg0@dots{}$arg9}. A trivial example: >> >> @smallexample >> define adder >> print $arg0 + $arg1 + $arg2 >>+end >> @end smallexample > > > In the example, I would suggest to use something other than arg0 etc., > to avoid confusion with arg0..arg9 as placeholders in the paragraph > where you wanted to remove @var. But this is an example of how to use $arg0 ?!?!? Also, it isn't my example, I only added the 'end'. > > >>+@kindex $argc > > > I'd replace this with "@cindex arguments for user-defined function". Replace or augment? I considered adding a kindex for $arg0...$arg9. I agree that a concept should be added, but how about: @cindex user-defined functions, argument passing Just a thought. > > Other than that, the documentation patch is okay with me. Thanks. Great, I'll wait for judgement on the code then. Thanks Andrew Stubbs