From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28818 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2012 22:40:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 28796 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Apr 2012 22:40:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (HELO mailhost.u-strasbg.fr) (130.79.200.153) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 22:40:34 +0000 Received: from md13.u-strasbg.fr (md13.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.200.248]) by mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.3/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id q3OMeWGe008695 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:40:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr) Received: from mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (ms15.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.204.115]) by md13.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.3/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id q3OMeD1J030615 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:40:14 +0200 (envelope-from pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr) Received: from E6510Muller (lec67-4-82-230-53-140.fbx.proxad.net [82.230.53.140]) (user=mullerp mech=LOGIN) by mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.3/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id q3OMeUt5006450 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:40:31 +0200 (envelope-from pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr) From: "Pierre Muller" To: Subject: ARI troubles Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 23:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: <000001cd226b$40dfdb70$c29f9250$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00835.txt.bz2 Hi all, it's been a long time since I really looked at the ARI web page... I wanted to remove the inline ARI rule as discussed earlier on the list. It degraded quite a lot recently: http://sourceware.org/gdb/current/ari/ But most of the critical renentrant bugs are just problems releated to introduction of common/common-utils.[ch] My problem here is that the same gdb_ari.sh script is used both for trunk as well as fixes branch... How should I cope with such changes? Pierre Muller GDB pascal language maintainer PS: Should I commit the change below that effecitvely removed inline ARI rule? Index: gdb_ari.sh =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gdbadmin/ss/gdb_ari.sh,v retrieving revision 1.110 diff -u -p -r1.110 gdb_ari.sh --- gdb_ari.sh 30 May 2011 19:55:37 -0000 1.110 +++ gdb_ari.sh 24 Apr 2012 22:39:35 -0000 @@ -676,15 +676,16 @@ FNR == 1 { } } -BEGIN { doc["inline"] = "\ -Do not use the inline attribute; \ -since the compiler generally ignores this, better algorithm selection \ -is needed to improved performance" - category["inline"] = ari_code -} -/(^|[^_[:alnum:]])inline([^_[:alnum:]]|$)/ { - fail("inline") -} +# Commented out, but left inside sources, just in case. +# BEGIN { doc["inline"] = "\ +# Do not use the inline attribute; \ +# since the compiler generally ignores this, better algorithm selection \ +# is needed to improved performance" +# category["inline"] = ari_code +# } +# /(^|[^_[:alnum:]])inline([^_[:alnum:]]|$)/ { +# fail("inline") +# } # This test is obsolete as this type # has been deprecated and finally suppressed from GDB sources cvs diff: Diffing CVSROOT