[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: python: Let pdb tracking not kill buffers
From: |
Andrii Kolomoiets |
Subject: |
Re: python: Let pdb tracking not kill buffers |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Oct 2019 15:28:06 +0300 |
> On Oct 5, 2019, at 09:40, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Aren't users supposed to use pdb via "M-x pdb" instead? (I don't use
> this, and don't debug Python programs, so maybe my question makes no
> sense.)
M-x pdb requires launch program in gud-mode while pdbtrack comint output
filter can be used in any buffer and mode, like interactive python
shell.
>> Please see attached patch. I certainly sure docstrings and naming are
>> not so good but they can be fine tuned later if the main idea will be
>> accepted.
>
> Besides the question I asked above, your patch is too large to be
> accepted without assigning copyright to the FSF. Would you like to
> start the legal paperwork rolling, so that any contributions from you
> could be accepted without limitations?
Yes, please.
>> +(defcustom python-pdbtrack-continue-command '("c" "cont" "continue")
>> + "Pdb continue command."
>> + :type 'list
>> + :group 'python)
>
> Each new defcustom should have a :version tag. Also, if they belong
> to the group of the current file, our convention is not to use :group,
> as that's redundant.
Would it be better to create a separate subgroup for pdbtracking related
variables?
>> +(defcustom python-pdbtrack-kill-buffers t
>> + "Kill buffers when tracking is finished.
>> +Only buffers opened during tracking will be killed."
>
> The first sentence should be "If non-nil, kill buffers when tracking
> is finished." (And that is somewhat unclear, because it isn't clear
> what it means "when tracking is finished".)
Please see updated patch.
pdb-track.patch
Description: Binary data