Re: [PATCH] MI Doco

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> From: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
> Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:26:11 +1200
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
>  > > ! However, CLI commands that use sequences of commands such @code{source},
>  > > ! @code{commands} will not work
>  > 
>  > I don't understand from this text what will not work.  (Please enclose
>  > input that would be typed by user in @kbd, btw.)  Do you mean if I
>  > type "source, commands", it will not work?  Or do you mean something
>  > else?
>  > 
>  > Also, you are missing "as" after "such", I think.
> 
> I'm not sure what I meant either.  I committed this part, as is, inadvertantly
> but I've tried to address it as part of the patch below.  Sorry.

Maybe you meant `commands', `while', etc.--those commands that prompt
for the body which ends with `end'?  Then `source' is not part of the
endangered commands.

>  > > ! target.  This is only present when GDB's event loop
>  > 
>  > Please use @value{GDBN} instead a literal "GDB".
> 
> I left this unchanged after reading the ensuing discussion.

The discussion was about "(gdb)" vs "(@value{GDBP})".  "GDB" should
still be converted to "@value{GDBN}", as that has nothing to do with
"set prompt".

But I see you did remove literal "GDB".

> just note that all I did here was move existing text.

Yes, I know.  Thanks.

> In the patch below, I'm trying to group the commands in a similar (but not
> identical) fashion to the CLI commands in the main part of the manual.  To
> that end, I would like to have the node ordering:
> 
> * GDB/MI Breakpoint Commands::
> * GDB/MI Program Context::
> * GDB/MI Thread Commands::
> * GDB/MI Program Execution::
> * GDB/MI Stack Manipulation::
> * GDB/MI Variable Objects::
> * GDB/MI Data Manipulation::
> * GDB/MI Tracepoint Commands::
> * GDB/MI Symbol Query::
> * GDB/MI File Commands::
> * GDB/MI Target Manipulation::
> * GDB/MI Miscellaneous Commands::
> 
> I've not done this in the patch because it would make it totally unreadable,
> of course.  Is such an ordering acceptable?

Yes.