From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 659 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2010 17:50:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 648 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Aug 2010 17:50:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from e24smtp04.br.ibm.com (HELO e24smtp04.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:50:13 +0000 Received: from mailhub3.br.ibm.com (mailhub3.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.110]) by e24smtp04.br.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o7KHkYdd009513 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:46:34 -0300 Received: from d24av05.br.ibm.com (d24av05.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.44]) by mailhub3.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o7KHtZdK1765588 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:55:35 -0300 Received: from d24av05.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av05.br.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o7KHo5h8005803 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:50:05 -0300 Received: from [9.8.0.248] ([9.8.0.248]) by d24av05.br.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id o7KHo5hC004187; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:50:05 -0300 Subject: Re: [RFA] Delayed physnames, revisited From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Doug Evans Cc: Tom Tromey , Keith Seitz , gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: References: <4C460EAC.3040600@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:50:00 -0000 Message-ID: <1282326560.3533.25.camel@hactar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-08/txt/msg00371.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 16:25 -0700, Doug Evans wrote: > Not to nitpick or anything, > Well, yes to nitpick ... :-) > > Folks are great at enforcing things like putting a space after the > function name in a function call, but not so good at enforcing having > a blank line between a function's comment and definition. I asked what was the convention regarding that a long time ago and the answer was something like "there's no defined convention"... -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center