Re: [RFA] Add new language: "unsupported"

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 10:26:42AM -0400, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> Joel Brobecker writes:
>  > As promised to Elena, this is a followup on: 
>  > 
>  >     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-04/msg00209.html
>  > 
>  > Basically, I added a new "unsupported" language which support is
>  > minimalistic (identical to what we do with the "asm" language).
>  > I didn't fancy "partial":
>  > 
>  >         (gdb) show lang
>  >         Current language:  auto; currently partial
>  > 
>  > I felt like it could confuse the user to think that "partial" is the
>  > name of a real language :-). But I'm not such a big fan of "unsupported"
>  > either, so all suggestions are welcome.
>  > 
> 
> minimal? I would think of 'basic' but that's obviously not good :-)
> 'unsupported' to me would imply that you still get the errors.

Minimal sounds like a good idea to me.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer