From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26813 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2006 22:25:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 26795 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jul 2006 22:25:31 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:25:27 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9240548CEB9 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:25:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 06414-01-9 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:25:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr (S0106000625ac85e1.vs.shawcable.net [70.71.27.110]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3005748CEAF for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:25:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 4B44F47EFA; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 15:25:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:25:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] New substitute-path commands Message-ID: <20060711222524.GC1262@adacore.com> References: <20060705215606.GF3580@adacore.com> <20060705230129.GA1145@nevyn.them.org> <20060706044733.GC673@adacore.com> <1152198199.6282.63.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> <20060706162952.GB24631@nevyn.them.org> <20060707052219.GA971@adacore.com> <20060711124739.GA18324@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060711124739.GA18324@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-07/txt/msg00099.txt.bz2 > 2. Should the end of the rule be anchored to end of string or > directory separator? I was thinking about this, and almost ready to implement it. But then I thought about the Windows case. On cygwin, the directory separator is '/', but then some tools probably use '\' and we accept it. On MinGW, the standard directory separator is '\', but GCC at least uses forward slashes as far as I know. So, in implementation terms, anchoring against the directory separator is tricky on Windows. I think we should accept both. I'm just not sure what is the best way of implementing this. Looks like we might not be able to avoid an #ifdef macro. -- Joel