Re: GDB MI Reverse Commands added [2 of 3]

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> From: "Jakob Engblom" <jakob@virtutech.com>
> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 16:38:07 +0200
> 
> Here are the documentation updates. 

Thanks.  I have a few comments:

> Changelog: "Added documentation of gdb-MI reverse debugging commands"

Please format the log entries according to examples you see in
gdb/doc/ChangeLog.

> ? Resumes the execution of the inferior program until a breakpoint is
> ! encountered, or until the inferior exits. If the @samp{--reverse}
                                            ^^
Two spaces between sentences, please (here and elsewhere).

> ! option is specified, resumes the reverse execution of the inferior
> ! program until a breakpoint is encountered, or until the inferior
> ! exits.

How can you exit in reverse?  I think you can only get to the
beginning of `main', no?

> ! Mode}), if the @samp{--all} is not specified, only the thread
> ! specified with the @samp{--thread} option (or current thread, if no
> ! @samp{--thread} is provided) is resumed.? If @samp{--all} is

What `--thread' option are you talking about here?  There was no such
option in the "Synopsis" part above.

> + If the @samp{--reverse} option is specified, resumes reverse execution
> + of the inferior program, stopping at the beginning of the previous
> + source line. Starting from the first line of a function, the command
> + will take you back to the caller of that function, before the function
> + was called.

I needed to read the last sentence several times before its meaning
hit me.  Suggest to rephrase thusly:

  If you issue this command on the first line of a function, it will
  take you back to the caller of that function, to the source line
  where the function was called.

> + If the @samp{--reverse} option is specified, resumes reverse execution
> + of the inferior program, stopping at the previous instruction. If the
> + previously executed instruction was a return from another instruction,
                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"another instruction" or "another function"?

> + it will continue to execute in reverse until the call to that function
> + (from the current stack frame) is reached.