From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26698 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2005 20:59:50 -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 26683 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2005 20:59:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Mar 2005 20:59:46 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j27KxjFL022652 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:59:45 -0500 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (dhcp83-80.boston.redhat.com [172.16.83.80]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j27Kxjn12323; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:59:45 -0500 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id A582F1A467A; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 16:01:52 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16940.49472.585572.202096@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 20:59:00 -0000 To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Improve "start" command for Ada In-Reply-To: <20050307192951.GP1750@adacore.com> References: <20041021034759.GP21300@gnat.com> <01c4b72e$Blat.v2.2.2$b14feb80@zahav.net.il> <20041021210951.GZ21300@gnat.com> <20041101194703.GH27334@gnat.com> <16810.33941.938548.637890@localhost.redhat.com> <20041201030309.GE1204@adacore.com> <20050209170543.GE18540@adacore.com> <20050307192951.GP1750@adacore.com> X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2 Joel Brobecker writes: > Hello Elena, > > Do you think you would have some time to look at this? The review > process stalled more than 3 months ago, and it would be nice to get > the problem fixed. In the meantime, I will KFAIL the tests in gdb.ada > that rely on the "start" command. It would be useful if you pointed to the last version of the patch to look at. Is this the last one? http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-10/msg00365.html If so, can you please add a comment about what could be done instead of calling ada_main_name directly? Something like what you wrote: > > If you want, what we can do is replace the hard-coded call to > > ada_main_name() by a loop of calls to a new language method, > > looping on all languages until we find a positive match. That > > way, the hard wiring to Ada disappears. Otherwise ok