Re: [OB PATCH] Fix doc for -add-inferior

[Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>]

On 06/04/2013 06:13 AM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> --- a/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
> +++ b/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
> @@ -34642,7 +34642,7 @@ Creates a new inferior (@pxref{Inferiors and Programs}).  The created
>   inferior is not associated with any executable.  Such association may
>   be established with the @samp{-file-exec-and-symbols} command
>   (@pxref{GDB/MI File Commands}).  The command response has a single
> -field, @samp{thread-group}, whose value is the identifier of the
> +field, @samp{inferior}, whose value is the identifier of the
>   thread group corresponding to the new inferior.
>
>   @subheading Example
> @@ -34650,7 +34650,7 @@ thread group corresponding to the new inferior.
>   @smallexample
>   @value{GDBP}
>   -add-inferior
> -^done,thread-group="i3"
> +^done,inferior="i3"
>   @end smallexample
>
>   @subheading The @code{-interpreter-exec} Command

Yes, there is an inconsistency between doc "thread-group" and code 
"inferior".  This inconsistency was introduced by "Multiexec MI" patch 
<http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-02/msg00585.html>.  Looks we 
have to fix either the doc or the code.  In MI, I prefer "thread-group" 
to "inferior".  When my MI notifications patches were reviewed last 
year, I had an impression that "thread-group" is preferred.  At least in 
MI notification, not sure it applies here or not.

--
Yao (éå)