Re: Save the length of inserted breakpoints

[Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>]

> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 11:04:15 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> 
> > Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 00:13:40 +0200 (CEST)
> > From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> > CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> > 
> > > FWIW, I agree with Daniel: it is better to pass a struct than its
> > > individual members, especially if we expect different targets to use
> > > different members of that struct.  In other words, passing a struct
> > > eases future maintenance pains.
> > 
> > And it obfuscates the interface.
> 
> I can't believe you really think that passing a struct instead of its
> several members obfuscates the interface in any significant way; GDB's
> code is replete with instances of passing a struct of which the caller
> uses only a small part.
> 
> I understand that you want to make a point, but let's not exaggerate
> our arguments to such a ridiculous degree.

If we don't try to make are interfaces as clean and simple as
possible, GDB will get more difficult to maintain.  Better spend a
little more effort now than trying to clean up the mess later on.

I'm willing to do the legwork to change the interface the way I
proposed.

Mark