From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3887 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2003 19:04:42 -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 3856 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2003 19:04:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (205.232.38.116) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2003 19:04:40 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 05C5C47D62; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:04:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:04:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Ada's throw/catch; Was: [RFC] Unexpected automatic language switch - get_frame_language() Message-ID: <20031210190439.GJ1296@gnat.com> References: <20031205224807.GE716@gnat.com> <20031210174750.GA7669@nevyn.them.org> <20031210181030.GI1296@gnat.com> <3FD766D9.5080908@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3FD766D9.5080908@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00300.txt.bz2 > Given that GDB already has an established generic documented and > "working" throw/catch mechanism, I'm not sure that there are advantages > to be had in adding a second. While Act would certainly benefit, I > don't know that the same can be argued for GDB as a whole. I understand completely, but I thought I'd make sure :). This is certainly a strong argument for us to change our current approach, since we would prefer our version of GDB and the FSF one to be as close as possible. -- Joel