From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#34589: 26.1.91; GDB-MI Display Complex Data Types Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 05:30:55 +0200 Message-ID: <83zhqbe2og.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83wolugz2r.fsf@gnu.org> <83va1aq1ui.fsf@gnu.org> <83o972pz92.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="128100"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: rpluim@gmail.com, 34589@debbugs.gnu.org, rms@gnu.org To: Gustaf Waldemarson Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 04 04:32:09 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eKn-000XFC-L8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2019 04:32:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47612 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eKm-0003SV-Ia for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:32:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41254) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eKg-0003SQ-Pt for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:32:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eKg-0006v1-3C for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:32:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45334) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eKf-0006u9-Si for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:32:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eKf-0001HB-Lj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:32:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 03:32:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 34589 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 34589-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B34589.15516702754849 (code B ref 34589); Mon, 04 Mar 2019 03:32:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 34589) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Mar 2019 03:31:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58877 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eJv-0001G9-1u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:31:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54845) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eJt-0001Fx-SL for 34589@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:31:14 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:42598) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eJo-0005AG-9B; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:31:08 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2181 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1h0eJi-0001qc-21; Sun, 03 Mar 2019 22:31:02 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Gustaf Waldemarson on Sun, 3 Mar 2019 21:32:46 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:156018 Archived-At: > From: Gustaf Waldemarson > Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 21:32:46 +0100 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , andrew.w.nosenko@gmail.com, rpluim@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org > > > Does the first patch have value on its own? If so, we can accept it without > > legal paperwork. > > I would argue that either patch have some value. The first patch enables display > of the complex data types and the second changes the interface to use a > non-deprecated function from the gdb interface that additionally lists function > arguments as well, something the previous one did not (at least if I have > understood the documentation correctly). > > Although, the first patch in my list is the bigger one. Wasn't that part of the > problem legal-wise? Yes. I asked about the first patch because it's small enough to be accepted even without legal paperwork. The second one exceeds the limits of that.