From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26615 invoked by alias); 30 Oct 2004 23:06:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26605 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2004 23:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO legolas.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.24) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 30 Oct 2004 23:06:58 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.154.168]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.3-GR) with ESMTP id CZJ87402 (AUTH halo1); Sun, 31 Oct 2004 01:06:16 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 23:06:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-ID: <01c4bed4$Blat.v2.2.2$7e1a1800@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <41824D61.3050208@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:02:09 -0400) Subject: Re: [commit] Fix info frame's saved registers output Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <41824D61.3050208@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00521.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:02:09 -0400 > From: Andrew Cagney > > 2004-10-27 Andrew Cagney > > * trad-frame.c (trad_frame_get_prev_register): Use > frame_unwind_register instead of frame_register_unwind Isn't it confusing to have 2 different functions whose names are just permutations of the same words? How can a GDB hacker know what is the difference between frame_register_unwind and frame_unwind_register, without reading the sources?