From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11174 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2003 03:04:48 -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 11166 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2003 03:04:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Oct 2003 03:04:48 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.24 #1 (Debian)) id 1ACVmJ-0000wC-IQ; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:04:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 03:04:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] target_open (target, ...) Message-ID: <20031023030447.GA3517@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3F96F8E6.5000702@redhat.com> <20031023023607.GA2637@nevyn.them.org> <3F97431D.3040500@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F97431D.3040500@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00682.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 10:55:25PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >Wrong patch? This is target_close, not target_open. It also deletes > >the target_open macro without adding a new target_open function. > > No, a 180 description. s/target_open/target_close/. The _macro_ > target_open() is _never_ called. Gotcha. > >Please don't add 'x'. There's nothing wrong with having a target_open > >function which calls target_ops->to_open. > > The vector already contains ->to_open and ->to_close methods so unless > we've switched to C++, I can't add a second to_close. > > Once the existing ->to_close is deprecated, I can rename ->to_xclose. OK. It'd be nice if you'd explain that sort of thing when posting the patch, though. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer