|
From: Josef W. <Jos...@gm...> - 2007-11-17 00:52:23
|
On Saturday 17 November 2007, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: > > > I am not really settled about "--out-file". I just think that options for > > similar functions in different tools should show some consistency. > > So I am really fine with an option "--<toolname>-out-file=..." with support > > for patterns (like %p). > > > > So I would change the according callgrind option to "--callgrind-out-file=...", > > independent of the fact that callgrind could produce further files with > > additional suffix. > > > > Is this OK? > > That sounds ok. In summary: > > --log-file=<pattern> > > --cachegrind-out-file=<pattern> > > --massif-out-file=<pattern> > > --callgrind-out-file=<pattern> > > The latter could also be --callgrind-out-prefix, but I'm ok with > --callgrind-out-file. The thing is that for normal use, it is the not a prefix, but the output file name. And even in other cases with multiple files, one will have exactly this name. So I think that should be fine. > We could also shorten the options names, eg. --cg-out-file, but I'm not too > fussed about that. I think the option will not be used to often; so a long name should be ok. The nice thing is that the long name matches quite fine the default output file name (for all of cachegrind, callgrind, massif). Josef > > Nick > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Valgrind-developers mailing list > Val...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers > |