Re: possible gdb agent expression extension

> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 18:07:38 -0400
> From: David Taylor <[email protected]>
> 
> Hopefully the markup is correct:

I cannot comment on the markup's idea because I don't really
understand what you are trying to say using that markup.  I think the
larger context is missing.

That @result{} at the end, with nothing after it, does look strange:
what "result" does this give?

> @item @code{setmem8} (0x??): @var{addr} @var{value} @result{}
> @item @code{setmem16} (0x??): @var{addr} @var{value} @result{}
> @item @code{setmem32} (0x??): @var{addr} @var{value} @result{}
> @item @code{setmem64} (0x??): @var{addr} @var{value} @result{}

If this is part of a @table, you will be much better off using "@table
@code", so that 0x?? etc. will be rendered in the appropriate
typeface.  (Btw, what does "0x??" signify?)

> Pop an address @var{addr} and a value @{value} from the stack.  For
> bytecode @code{setmem}@var{n}, set the @var{n}-bit value at @var{addr}
> to the least significant @var{n}-bits of @var{value}.  Ignoring
> architecture pointer alignment issues, it is as if the operation
> 
> *@code{uint}@var{n}@code{_t}@var{addr} = @code{uint}@var{n}@code{_t}@var{value}

You cannot stick a code portion in the middle of text just like that,
you should use @smallexample (and then drop the @code parts, as they
are automatically used for text inside @smallexample).