This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PROPOSAL] Checking for supported packets - revised

On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 09:26:47PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > +@item qSupported @r{[}:@var{feature} @r{[};@var{feature}@r{]}... @r{]}
>                                                                 ^^^
> This should use @dots{}, not literal dots.

Thanks!  Fixed.

> > +No values of @var{feature} are defined yet.
> Is there any way to somehow mark this last sentence, so that we will
> remove it as soon as at least one feature is defined?  I'm afraid we
> will forget.
> > +Currently, all remote packets which are not mentioned in the response
> > +will be probed individually, just as if the @samp{qSupported} query
> > +was not supported.  In the future, some new packets may be added to
> Same here.

Well, I am intending to add a packet of that sort shortly after this
patch goes in.  I couldn't think of any other way to write the
documentation to reflect the current state, in which there are no
examples.  A @c comment wouldn't help much; it's just as easily

If you have any ideas on a better way to mark it, I'll do that;
otherwise, I will simply flag this message, and make sure that
I revisit it soon.

> > +@item @var{name}?
> > +The remote protocol packet @var{name} may be supported, and @value{GDBN}
> > +should attempt to detect the packet when it is needed.
> "attempt to detect the packet"?  Perhaps it's better to say "attempt
> to detect whether the packet is supported".

How about this?

The remote protocol packet @var{name} may be supported, and @value{GDBN}
should auto-detect support when it is needed.

> > +The name of a packet which can be marked as supported or unsupported
> > +is the text of the packet in this documentation, up to but not
> > +including the first punctuation character or variable.  For example, a
> > +target which supports hardware watchpoints but not hardware
> > +breakpoints might report @samp{Z0-;Z1-;Z2+;Z3+;Z4+}.  An exception is
> > +made for @samp{qPart:@var{object}} packets; the name of the packet
> > +includes the @var{object}, but not the @var{annex}.  Individual
> > +@samp{qPart} objects types must be reported separately.
> Please add a cross-reference to the two places where the two example
> packets are described, so that the reader could consult them in case
> they don't remember the packets' formats by heart.

To Z0 and qPart, you mean?  I don't see how to do it.  They're not
nodes; they're @items in tables.  Would an xref to the entire packet
table, which is in the previous section, be helpful for Z0?  qPart is
in the same table as this paragraph.

Daniel Jacobowitz

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]