From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24823 invoked by alias); 30 Sep 2002 18:35:28 -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 24811 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2002 18:35:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 Sep 2002 18:35:28 -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 g8UIGri32487 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:16:53 -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 g8UIZRf01057 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:35:27 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (IDENT:root@tooth.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.29]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8UIZQf30578 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:35:26 -0400 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id D183DFF7C; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 13:25:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15768.35078.659373.108910@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 11:35:00 -0000 To: Keith Seitz Cc: Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Interpreters (~final) (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00768.txt.bz2 I am looking more at the branch than at the patch. I am trying to come up with another way of breaking this down. If I am lucky. A couple of little things I noticed. More in a bit. The error messages in interps.c print strings with mi_ in them, like: + error + ("interpreter-exec: mi_interpreter_execute: error in command: \"%s\".", + prules[i]); The use of wrapper.[ch] is discouraged. Put the necessary safe functions near where they are used (so we wack 2 files from the list of stuff to merge). Look at corefile.c:safe_read_memory_integer, for instance. Who uses gdb_delete_interpreter? If it is there "just in case" add a comment that says so. I bet more changes are coming down the pipe, but could we tighten the interfaces a bit. I think some more functions could be made static and removed from .h files. Elena