bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#34589: 26.1.91; GDB-MI Display Complex Data Types


From: Gustaf Waldemarson
Subject: bug#34589: 26.1.91; GDB-MI Display Complex Data Types
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:05:48 +0100

Hello,

After quite some time here, I have finally been able to get the proper
legal confirmation from Arm to submit patches. As far as I understand
things, any patch that I submit for Emacs will now have the copyright
correctly reassigned and should now be usable without any issues.

That said, during these months I've been rethinking the variable GDB
window somewhat, and would like to see what people thinks of a rework of
the following kind:

- Instead of displaying variables as | 'type' | 'name' | 'value' |,
  display them as | 'name' | 'short-type' | 'value' |, where
  'short-type' is the first `X' characters of the type name.

  I personally find this to be more useful, especially for C++ template
  types which can easily occupy the whole window otherwise.

- Possibly add a new tab 'behind' the variable window which contains the
  /full/ type name. (This part may also have to interface with the new
  tabbing interface, something I'll have to look into when I've got some
  time.)

(Also, if interesting, should this kind of rework be submitted as a
separate ticket?)

Den fre 8 mars 2019 kl 10:07 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>:
>
> > From: Gustaf Waldemarson <gustaf.waldemarson@gmail.com>
> > Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2019 09:05:26 +0100
> > Cc: 34589@debbugs.gnu.org, "Andrew W. Nosenko" <andrew.w.nosenko@gmail.com>,
> >       Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com>, rms@gnu.org
> >
> > >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.
> >
> > Ah, got it. Feel free to review and include it if you find it useful.
>
> Thanks.  Unfortunately, it turns out that the first patch makes little
> sense without the second, as most of the code modified by the former
> is introduced in the latter.  So I didn't apply any of your changes
> for now; hopefully, you will be able to overcome the legal obstacles
> at some point.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]