This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename)
- From: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>, iam ahal <hal9000ed2k at gmail dot com>, pmuldoon at redhat dot com, tromey at redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:47:58 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename)
- References: <BANLkTinD+9_Mkug8o2VhZ03L6XSriL_RKQ@mail.gmail.com> <E1Qdhn8-0000fE-TK@fencepost.gnu.org> <20110704205101.GU2407@adacore.com>
On Monday 04 July 2011 21:51:01, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: iam ahal <hal9000ed2k@gmail.com>
> > > On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:12 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > > > But a larger concern is that GNU coding standards frown on using
> > > > "path" when you really mean "file name". So I think we should rename
> > > > the option "basename" and the documentation should say
> > >
> > > What's about backtrace's argument name "nopath"?
> >
> > I stated my suggestion. I'll let Joel and others decide whether it is
> > mandatory to change to "basename" or somesuch.
>
> FWIW, I think "basename" is better than "nopath".
Another +1.
--
Pedro Alves