This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: pr 11067 patch
On 02/19/10 13:50, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:53:45 +0100, Chris Moller wrote:
The problem is that I don't know any way to change the enum
formatting for CLI but leave it alone for MI-.
...
some way to distinguish between running under CLI vs. MI if that's the right
thing to do.
After I wrote the patch below according to Tom Tromey the Python pretty
printing applies even to the MI protocol values, therefore IMO it should also
apply to this new enum printing which is also some form of pretty printing.
Therefore my MI / CLI suggestion has been already rejected by the Python
pretty printing precedence and the patch below should be dropped.
How about this: The existing patch contains a test
if (options->summary || recurse != 0)
fputs_filtered (TYPE_FIELD_NAME (type, i), stream);
else {
/* new formatting stuff */
}
That limited the format change to unsummarised top-level "p <enum
thingy>" circumstances. If I make that test
if (options->summary || recurse != 0 ||
ui_out_is_mi_like_p (interp_ui_out
(top_level_interpreter ())))
i.e., checking if the print is to an MI whatever-it-is, the MI tests
that failed under the original patch (mi-var-display and
mi2-var-display) run okay as they originally were, which suggests to me
that MI will go on getting enums formatted the way it expects them.
Will that work?
Chris