RE: [PATCH] gdb_ari.sh cleanup

["Pierre Muller" <muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr>]

Hi Joel,

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Joel Brobecker
> Envoyé : Friday, April 17, 2009 2:19 AM
> À : Pierre Muller
> Cc : gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Objet : Re: [PATCH] gdb_ari.sh cleanup
> 
> > I did not handle two macros, because
> > they are unused but are still present in docs:
> > REGISTER_U_ADDR
> > PROCESS_LINENUMBER_HOOK

  Yes , please do it as it seems that 
at least for REGISTER_U_ADDR, it is not a 
node that you can just remove directly.

> Let's just remove them from the documentation. It's a very simple
> change, but let me know if you'd like me to take care of it.
> 
> > Miscellaneous questions:
> > 1a) Should the PARAMS rule be moved to code section?
> > 1b) Same question for __FUNCTION__ rule.
> > 1c) Idem for ARGSUSED
> 
> Does it really make a difference? If it helps you analyze the results,
> then I'd say go for it.
> 
> > 1d) Idem for

   Whoops: this was ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED
I will then move all those to ari_code type.
 
> (name missing?)
> 
> > 2) LITTLE_ENDIAN and BIG_ENDIAN still exists in configure,
> > should I still remove the rule?
> 
> I don't think so. I don't know what the details are, but I'm wondering
> whether the macros might be defined by the compiler, thus making it
> possible for us to accidently reintroduce this usage again.  I'd say,
> let's keep the rule.

  OK, I leave these one in.
 
> > 3) HAVE_VFORK is still present in config.in
> > should I keep the rule or should we remove it from config.in first?
> 
> We need to keep the rule. That macro is still used by gdb_vfork.h
> and it is a valid use of that macro. In a way, this is very similar
> to the use of "abort" - only very selected uses are allowed.

  OK, same here.


Thanks for the answers,


Pierre Muller
Pascal language support maintainer for GDB