This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patchv3 12/11] New options {relative,basename}-with-system-absolute
- From: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 19:41:31 -0800
- Subject: Re: [patchv3 12/11] New options {relative,basename}-with-system-absolute
- References: <20130129221019.GA27463@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20130130074820.GA15998@host2.jankratochvil.net> <8338xiiodg.fsf@gnu.org> <83sj5ih6c4.fsf@gnu.org> <20130130185344.GA15502@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83obg6h1pf.fsf@gnu.org> <CADPb22SoELSecKH7t5+ROi=jx9ZJz-yEdx+tDaNdTD8Urg6_yw@mail.gmail.com> <83libagghx.fsf@gnu.org> <CADPb22S_GimHJgxCLMuRySZeWQdu-_fuTtSC9MX9-7Y-_W9GLQ@mail.gmail.com> <83lib9chfb.fsf@gnu.org>
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:07:09 -0800
>> From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
>> Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> >> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 13:48:05 -0800
>> >> From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
>> >> Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
>> >>
>> >> The nice thing about {relative,basename}-with-system-absolute is that
>> >> they are clear.
>> >
>> > They aren't to me. They might be clear _after_ you know what they
>> > mean, exactly. But then so would be every shorthand of them.
>>
>> So then why not reduce them even more?
>
> That could work, but hard to tell without seeing specific suggestions.
Apologies. My point was that at some point things become too terse.
Names aren't just mnemonics to trigger memory - ideally they shouldn't
have to trigger any memory as the name is already clear.
What about basename-with-system-absolute is not clearer than basename-absolute?