From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7680 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2002 23:44:32 -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 7628 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:44:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:44:31 -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 gB5NJLP14205 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:19:21 -0500 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 gB5NiVD24177 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:44:31 -0500 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (romulus-int.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.46]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB5NiT926218; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:44:29 -0500 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id D39B3FF79; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:40:09 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15855.58328.854004.977049@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:45:00 -0000 To: David Carlton Cc: Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy Subject: Re: PING [RFA] DWARF-2, static data members In-Reply-To: References: <15855.46570.409897.896793@localhost.redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00209.txt.bz2 David Carlton writes: > On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:24:10 -0500, Elena Zannoni said: > > > Makes sense. Hoever, could you leave the comments inside the 'then' bodies? > > Like > > if (blah) > > { > > /* C++ static member. */ > > [...] > > } > > Will do. > > > I think it would be useful to add a g++ version number or a date in > > the comments, because at some point down the road we may want to > > obsolete the old form. > > Right, I'll add that. > > > Was the patch to gcc submitted, or the gcc PR fixed otherwise? > > No, I can't submit the patch to GCC until a version of GDB including > this patch is released, because otherwise they'll emit debugging info > that we can't handle. > I know, but I figured that, given their 'freeze' cycles, it could get reviewed in the meantime. Speaking of which, I've heard rumours that the Dberlin patch for namespace debug info has been reviewed... Indeed it has: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-11/msg00978.html Elena > I'll commit it with the changes to the comments that you requested. > > David Carlton > carlton@math.stanford.edu