From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7253 invoked by alias); 15 May 2003 22:01:07 -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 7241 invoked from network); 15 May 2003 22:01:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 May 2003 22:01:07 -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 h4FM17H08313 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 18:01:07 -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 h4FM16I13511; Thu, 15 May 2003 18:01:06 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-3.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.3]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4FM15Q02254; Thu, 15 May 2003 18:01:05 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h4FM0xa14491; Thu, 15 May 2003 15:00:59 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 22:01:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1030515220059.ZM14490@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Kevin Buettner "Re: [WIP/RFC] MIPS registers overhaul" (May 14, 3:00pm) References: <1030510002453.ZM3880@localhost.localdomain> <3EBD6131.30209@redhat.com> <1030514220025.ZM10373@localhost.localdomain> To: Andrew Cagney Subject: Re: [WIP/RFC] MIPS registers overhaul Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00261.txt.bz2 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