Re: Pending breakpoints and scripts

[Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn at redhat dot com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:39:05PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:24:32PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > > The real problem here is with batch scripts, the change breaks existing 
> > >
> > > > > > script behavior (which is never a good thing).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How about this, we introduce:
> > > > > > 	nquery()
> > > > > > 	yquery()
> > > > > > where the default (batch mode, and when return is pressed is n/y 
> > > > > > respectively).  We'd need the language police to look over the 
> > > >
> > > > interface >>but should otherwize be ok.
> > >
> > > > > Works for me.

Me too.

> > > > Lets see if we can pin down the interface (adding JeffJ to the CC list):
> > > >
> > > > nquery("A question?")
> > > >
> > > > 	A question? [n]:
> > > >
> > > > 	- press return => implied "n"
> > > > 	- batch mode => implied "n"
> > >
> > >
> > > How would you feel about "[n/y]"?  Otherwise, I like this.
> >
> > As in?
>
>
> nquery("A question?");
>   A question? (n or y) <CURSOR>
>
> or
>
>   A question? [n/y]: <CURSOR>
>
> Simply to clarify that it is a yes-no question.

I agree you have to indicate a yes/no question.  Would it be clearer to add 
square brackets around the default in each case ([y] or n) vs (y or [n])?  This 
is closer to the old query which was (y or n).

-- Jeff J.