Re: [PATCH] tracepoint.c

[Klee Dienes <klee@apple.com>]

> Ah, I think we've had a communication breakdown.  I thought that
> your 
> previous patch was defunct, and we were waiting for you to resubmit
> it. 
> Rereading the old thread, I can see where I lost continuity.  Sorry
> for 
> the confusion -- can we start again? 
>  
> I actually liked the 'save-breakpoints' command, and was thinking 
> of pinging you to see when you planned to resubmit it.  But I don't 
> like it being grouped together with the 'future-break' command. 
> They're really separate, though related, and I'd rather consider 
> separate functionalities separately.  Besides, the two together 
> make a really huge patch, one that it's difficult to review  
> line by line. 
 
OK, that's fair.  My main reason for combining the patches was that 
they had mutual dependencies on each other ('save-breakpoints' knows 
about 'future' breakpoints so that it can save and restore them; the 
future-break code knows about the 'original-flags' field added by 
'save-breakpoints').  But I can probably remove the future-break 
support from the 'save-breakpoints' command, and resubmit future-break 
once 'save-breakpoints' is committed. 
 
> As for the change to tracepoints, I had that sitting in my source 
> tree from your earlier submission, and I was just cleaning up loose 
> ends.  I decided to make sure that didn't get lost, while waiting 
> for you to resubmit your patch.  Sorry if I jumped the gun on you. 
 
Anything that reduces the size of our diffs is a win from my 
perspective; I just wanted to make sure I was understanding the 
process properly. 
 
> If a week goes by without a response, you should ping the list. 
> We might have gotten distracted ourselves, or there could be a 
> misunderstanding such as this one. 
 
OK, will do.  I believe there's only one other patch outstanding at 
this point; I'm just eager to get it resolved, since it's holding up 
some of our more interesting Objective-C patches.  I'll send a ping 
now; thanks for the advice!