[RFC] [PATCH] Provide the ability to write the frame unwinder in Python

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 20:31:09 -0700
> From: Alexander Smundak <asmundak@google.com>
> Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo@igalia.com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> 
> --- a/gdb/NEWS
> +++ b/gdb/NEWS
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>    ** gdb.Objfile objects have a new attribute "username",
>       which is the name of the objfile as specified by the user,
>       without, for example, resolving symlinks.
> +  ** You can now write frame unwinders in Python.

This part is OK.

> +@node Unwinding Frames in Python
> +@subsubsection Unwinding Frames in Python
> +@cindex Unwinding frames in Python.

@cindex entries should generally begin with a lower-case letter.
That's because alphabetic sorting in various locales might produce
different orders when mixed-case letters are involved, so the order in
the Index nodes will be different depending on where the manual was
produced.  We want to avoid that.

> +In GDB terminology ``unwinding'' is the process of finding the
      ^^^
"@value{GDBN}" (here and elsewhere in the patch).

> +previous frame (that is, caller's) from the current one. An unwinder
                                                          ^^
Two spaces between sentences (here and elsewhere in the patch).

> +(for example, and application running Java Virtual Machine) sometimes
                 ^^^
"an"

> +returns an object (an instance of gdb.UnwindInfo class) describing
                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This should be in @code, as it's a Python symbol.

> +usually found in the corresponding xxx-@code{tdep.h} file in the gdb
                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It is better to write @file{@var{platform}-tdep.h} here; this explains
better what is that "xxx" in the text.

> +It also provides a factory method to create a gdb.UnwindInfo instance
                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
@code

> +using one of the @code{frame_id_build_xxx} functions.  The exact

Once again, please try a way to make "xxx" more clear, as I did above.

Thanks.