From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30507 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2002 18:11:02 -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 30426 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2002 18:11:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2002 18:11:00 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g3UIAuE13676; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 13:10:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 11:11:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200204301810.g3UIAuE13676@duracef.shout.net> To: msnyder@redhat.com, petrs@caldera.com Subject: Re: [RFC] FORTRAN95 Expression parser Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg01158.txt.bz2 Coincidentally, I was looking at a FORTRAN pr this morning. I think the existing FORTRAN expression parser is lame and I would not miss it. I favor the side-by-side strategy. Keep the files as f95-x files. Let the gdb people play with it side by side. If the new interface dominates the old interface, we can remove the old f-x files. If we think there will be a constituency for the old interface, then we can release both. The problem with merging is that it makes the code much less readable and makes it harder to discard the old code. My two cents, Michael C