RFC: Syntax for logging
Daniel Jacobowitz
drow@mvista.com
Sun Jun 22 18:41:00 GMT 2003
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 02:32:41PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> >Hmm, two options:
> > set logging
>
> Not this. It should behave like:
>
> (gdb) set architecture
> "set architecture" must be followed by "auto" or an architecture name.
OK.
>
> > unset logging
> >
> >I like "unset logging"; how about you? The only thing we use unset for
> >at the moment is "unset environment" but I think it extends naturally.
>
> so (slightly wierd) yes this. Be sure to mention it in the help
> message. Perhaphs, also accept ``set logging off'', and ``set logging
> on'' as those are the first things I'd try :-)
>
> Hmm, just noticed, the options are optional, I was thinking that they
> were required.
>
> set logging [redirect|log] [append|overwrite] FILE
>
> The syntax will lead to confusion with things like:
>
> set logging l
> or
> set logging redirect a
Ugh, I'd forgotten about the abbreviations.
> suggest instead:
>
> set logging on [FILE]
> default gdb.log, log, append?
> set logging off
> set logging file FILE
> set logging append {true,false}
> set logging redirect {true,false}
>
> so that the [FILE] isn't context dependent. Realisticly, I think people
> will only use:
>
> set logging on
> set logging off
That looks good. I'll just ditch the unset idea.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list