From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12556 invoked by alias); 13 Nov 2003 16:39:08 -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 12549 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2003 16:39:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Nov 2003 16:39:08 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.24 #1 (Debian)) id 1AKKUt-0004xi-Iy; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:39:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:39:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Richard Henderson , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, "J. Johnston" Subject: Re: [commit] Order parameters "rw", not "wr" Message-ID: <20031113163907.GA19010@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Richard Henderson , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, "J. Johnston" References: <3FB0010D.7040108@redhat.com> <20031112021817.GA27225@redhat.com> <3FB3A2E8.8050003@redhat.com> <20031113154027.GA12374@nevyn.them.org> <3FB3B2EC.10607@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3FB3B2EC.10607@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00262.txt.bz2 On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 11:35:56AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >>O_RDWR Open for reading and writing > >>S_IRWXU 00700 user (file owner) has read, write and execute permission > >>drwxr-xr-x 2 cagney cagney 8192 Nov 11 13:52 bin > > > > > >Those aren't arguments, just a couple occurances of "read, write", so I > >fail to see the connection. Consider memcpy, strcat, fgets, sprintf. > > What you list here have little if any relevance to the interfaces in > question. There are, as far as I know, no examples of functions in the standard library which take an output buffer last. As much of a C convention as there is suggests they belong at the beginning. If you're going to ignore that very weak precedent, that's your perogative, go right ahead. But please don't claim that "O_RDWR" is in any way relevant to the argument ordering on target_xfer_partial either. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer