This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA]: Turn on Ada support
Eli,
Thanks for your comments. I have adopted most of them. Comments on your
comments follow.
> I don't mind, provided that those placebos never see a GDB release: I
> don't want to have a manual released with empty sections/nodes. So if
> you plan to finish them up before the next release, it's okay in the
> meantime to have them in the form you left them.
In that case, I think I'll just remove these stubs. They're easy enough
to insert when implemented.
> > +in function or file @var{B}.'' When @var{B} is a file name, you must typically
> > +surround it in single quotes.
>
> What else can B be in this context?
A function name. I take it "function or file @var{B}" is too terse for you?
> > +@table @code
> > +@item break exception
>
> Every user command should be indexed with a @kindex. (In this case,
> it's sufficient to have a single "@kindex break exception" rather
> than 2 entries, as these are variations of the same command.)
Actually, we'll remove this, because it isn't yet implemented and its syntax
going to be changed anyway.
> This should say "as of @value{GDBN} version X.YY". A year or two from
> now, someone will have hard time updating this verbiage given the
> changes in Ada support.
OK, but I am not sure what editorial comment you are implying with the
word "verbiage" (:->).
> > +The type of the @t{'Address} attribute may not be @t{System.Address}.
>
> I think you should use @code instead of @t in this and similar cases.
Umph. The problem is that @code{'Address} generates `'Address' in Info files,
which looks odd.
Paul