This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GDB Speak: `inferior' rather than `target'?


On Dec 2,  3:38pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> In trying to correctly and clearly word some gdb comments (and yes ok, 
> and internal doco), I'm left wondering if we should `newspeak' some 
> terminology here and use the word `inferior' instead of `target'.
> 
> The problem with `target' is that it is totally overloaded.  The 
> configuration target, the running target the target architecture, ....
> 
> Hence, when refering to an instance of the program being debugged, the 
> word `inferior' should be used.  Of course, this would mean that `core' 
> becomes an inferior (...).
> 
> Thoughts?

I may be wrong, but it's my impression that the use of the word
`inferior' to describe an instance of the program being debugged is
unique to GDB.  That said, I don't think that the word `target' is
appropriate either.  I wish we could come up with some other term
altogether...

Kevin


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]