On Ср, ноя 13, 2019 at 15:23, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 6:39 AM Segher Boessenkool
<seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 04:17:17PM +0300, Konstantin Kharlamov wrote:
> On Вт, ноя 12, 2019 at 14:08, Andreas Schwab <sch...@suse.de>
> wrote:
> >On Nov 12 2019, Konstantin Kharlamov wrote:
> >> I'm definitely missing something. Who are these users, and how
can
> >>they
> >> make anything useful of these functions if they don't even
pass an
> >> argument?
> >
> >By printing the desired value.
>
> Hah, okay. Well, in this case their workflow now gonna be 2 times
> simpler since they don't have to type in two commands, but only
one :)
Do we have to type parentheses now? That more than undoes that
gain :-/
> Besides, I suspect, the number of actual users of this gdbinit is
> around zero, otherwise someone would have noticed the warning
that gdb
> prints on every usage of these functions while the PATCH 1/2 is
not
> applied.
There are users. There are users who have been used to this
behaviour
for many many many years.
People just do (say I have an "rtx insn"):
p insn
pr
Indeed. I use this constantly.
Thanks everyone for answers. No, you don't have to type parentheses.
Gdb has it like in Haskell, i.e. arguments are separated by just
whitespace. So you type `pr insn`
You know what, I came up with an alternative solution that won't break
anyone's workflow neither confuse newbies: I can add a check for number
of arguments, and to branch on that to use either $ or $arg0.
I'll resend then a bit later the patchset with the fixed changelog for
the 1st patch, and these alternative changes for the 2nd patch.
