Re: [RFC/WIP PATCH 00/14] I/T sets

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> writes:

Pedro> Following up on <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2011-11/msg00013.html>.
Pedro> This patch set seeds an implementation of a general
Pedro> inferior/process/thread/core set construct, or inferior/thread set
Pedro> (I/T set, or just itset) for short, which should allow users to refer
Pedro> to large numbers of inferiors, processes, threads, and cores in a
Pedro> consistent way and using a flexible syntax.

Ok, I read through the series and sent all my comments.  Some patches I
did not review in detail, since I don't feel competent to do so.

Pedro> IPTC sets are a collection of arbitrarily many processes,
Pedro> threads, and cores.

I wish we had a better name.

The current name seems to gain a letter with every new thread on the
topic :-)

Pedro> Along the idea that we
Pedro> need an intersection operator somehow, an idea I've been kicking in
Pedro> the background, is to make all kinds of objects have the same stand,
Pedro> and require, say, a one letter prefix to identify what kind of object
Pedro> we're specifying.  E.g, i for inferior, p for process, t for thread, c
Pedro> for core and a for Ada task.  In this scheme, the '.'  is really a set
Pedro> intersection operator, and the ',' is the union operator.  I'm very
Pedro> much inclined to try this route, but I'm also very interested in
Pedro> learning other's opinions.

I like this idea.

Tom