Re: [WIP/RFC] MIPS registers overhaul

[Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>]

On May 14,  3:00pm, Kevin Buettner wrote:

> I'll adopt the following naming scheme:
> 
>     rawnums	- for code which uses and should continue to use raw numbers
>     cookednums	- for code which uses and should continue to use cooked
>                   numbers
>     regnums	- for one of two cases, either code that's currently using
>     		  raw numbers that should be converted to be cooked, or
> 		  for code which I'm unsure of.  (Either case, these'll
> 		  be raw numbers.  When someone converts the code or decides
> 		  that the "raw" usage is correct, the name should be
> 		  changed.)
> 
> For the last category, I'm open to suggestions for some other name.

I've decided I don't like the name "regnums" that well for the last
category.  I've settled on the name "rawnums_c" instead.  The "_c"
suffix indicates that they *should* be cooked.  (Yes, it's terse, but I
fear that anything longer will make the code unwieldy.)  I'll also put
in a comment at each ``rawnums_c'' initialization indicating that the
code needs to be converted at some point to use cooked register
numbers.  E.g.:

  /* This function needs to be converted to use cooked register numbers.  */
  const struct mips_regnums *rawnums_c = mips_raw_regnums (gdbarch);

Kevin