From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12276 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2002 20:54:54 -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 12260 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2002 20:54:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Oct 2002 20:54:53 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g98KZEX25728 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 16:35:14 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g98Ksqf26133; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 16:54:52 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-14.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.14]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g98Kspa19620; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 16:54:51 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g98Ksk416833; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 13:54:46 -0700 Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 13:54:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1021008205446.ZM16832@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: David Carlton "[rfc] split up symtab.h" (Oct 8, 1:14pm) References: To: David Carlton , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfc] split up symtab.h Cc: Jim Blandy , Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00183.txt.bz2 On Oct 8, 1:14pm, David Carlton wrote: > I'm sick of having to recompile half of GDB every time I touch > symtab.h. There's lots of different things in that file; it's > included in 137 different places (counting only the gdb directory, not > gdb/mi, etc.), but there's no one thing that it defines that is used > in more than 71 places, and a lot of things that it defines are used > in a lot fewer places than that. [...] > Anyways, if anybody else is similarly annoyed with symtab.h then I'll > try to split things up and make a more concrete RFA in a bit. Aside from the build time issue, are there other reasons why splitting up symtab.h is desirable? Here are several reasons for not splitting it: 1) The list of includes for many .c files will (I suspect) grow quite a bit. If it turns out that you'll be replacing one #include statement with five or size (per source file), I can't really see that making the split was an advantage. 2) One could argue that modifying symtab.h *should* be a heavy weight operation. I.e, you're modifying something that's at the very heart of gdb and you need to take great care. 3) Makefile.in maintenance becomes harder due to the larger number of header files. I should note that I don't find any of the above reasons to be overly compelling. I just think that we need a better reason for making such a split than the build time consideration. Kevin