Re: [RFA] (try to) consistently use 'frame level' concept instead of 'frame number'.

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> From: Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>
> Cc: Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>
> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 00:15:36 +0200
> 
> Following the discussion in the 'frame apply' patch and the patch proposed
> in https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2018-06/msg00170.html
> the idea is rather to speak about 'frame level' to identify a frame,
> rather than 'frame number'.

I question the wisdom of changing such veteran terminology.

> -@cindex frame number
> -@value{GDBN} assigns numbers to all existing stack frames, starting with
> +@cindex frame level
> +In @value{GDBN}, each existing stack frame has a level, starting with
>  zero for the innermost frame, one for the frame that called it,
> -and so on upward.  These numbers do not really exist in your program;
> -they are assigned by @value{GDBN} to give you a way of designating stack
> +and so on upward.  These levels give you a way of designating stack
>  frames in @value{GDBN} commands.

If we are going to make this change, then I would suggest to keep the
index entry, _add_ to it an entry about "frame level", and explain
here what that level is, something like this:

  @value{GDBN} labels each existing stack frame with a @dfn{level}, a
  number that is zero for the innermost frame, one for the frame that
  called it, and so on upward.  These level numbers give you a way of
  designating stack frames in @value{GDBN} commands.

> -it had a separate frame, which is numbered zero as usual, allowing
> +it had a separate frame, which has a level zero as usual, allowing
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^
"level of zero".

> -Select frame number @var{n}.  Recall that frame zero is the innermost
> +Select frame level @var{n}.  Recall that frame zero is the innermost
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Select frame whose level is @var{n}."

Thanks.