This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Archer project.
Re: PR 11067
On 02/04/10 18:53, Tom Tromey wrote:
Chris> Just FYI, this patch breaks a handful of existing tests:
Chris> None of them are hard to fix in the expects--I just wanted The World
Chris> to realise that there are going to be noticeable consequences to this
Chris> fairly minor nicety. It'll take me a bit to fix the t/cs--if The
Chris> Powers That Be would rather this patch not proceed, I'd appreciate it
Chris> if you'd let me know sooner rather than later and spare me all the
Chris> fix-up work.
Usually you just have to do it and see what happens. Even if we all
agree on a format here, someone else might disagree on gdb-patches, or
they might think of some new reason for it to be different.
I, personally, want some form of this change, because every time I type
"p FOO" and get "$1 = FOO", I think, grrr, gdb could have told me what I
really wanted to know. If enough people dislike it we can always add
'set print blah blah'.
Based on what people were saying yesterday, I thought I'd go with
$1 = Val1=(enum E)56
It looks like a legitimate C expression. Lacking spaces, it's cohesive,
and it's easily understood to present the same information in multiple