From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16523 invoked by alias); 29 Feb 2004 09:41:21 -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 16496 invoked from network); 29 Feb 2004 09:41:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (213.93.115.144) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Feb 2004 09:41:19 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i1T9fFQj000266; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:41:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i1T9fEEA000403; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:41:14 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p3/8.12.6/Submit) id i1T9fEmb000400; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:41:14 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:41:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200402290941.i1T9fEmb000400@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> From: Mark Kettenis To: eliz@elta.co.il CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on 29 Feb 2004 08:06:56 +0200) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cleanup i386-nat.c References: <200402281538.i1SFcNds012429@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00886.txt.bz2 Date: 29 Feb 2004 08:06:56 +0200 From: Eli Zaretskii > Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:38:23 +0100 (CET) > From: Mark Kettenis > > The coding style in this file had some quirks, so I committed the > attached. That's largely my code, so please explain the changes, so that I never repeat any mistakes I've committed. I've read the entire patch, and I must say that I don't understand even a single change you made. * I did some s/x86/i386/g because i386-nat.c was the only file talking about x86. * The coding standards say that every comment should be a full sentence, starting with a capital and ending with a full stop (a dot). This also applies to comments on lines with code. To prevent some unnecessary line-wrapping, I used M-; to start them at what's the canonical column according to Emacs. * There were some lines in the code that were too long. Some of these were hard to break, so I used some creativity here. In the comments reformatting department, I guess we have different setting for fill-column (what is the canonical one, btw?), but as for the rest, I don't have a clue. So please do explain. According to Emacs, the default setting for the fill-column is 70. > - /* Four(eigth on x86_64) is the maximum length an x86 debug register > + int align = addr % max_wp_len; > + /* Four (eigth on AMD64) is the maximum length a debug register Here, there's a real typo in the comment, but it wasn't fixed. Hmm, sorry about that. Will fix it sometime after Andrew's cut the branch. Mark