From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28952 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2006 12:32:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 28870 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jul 2006 12:32:33 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 12:32:32 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1G2SGz-0002I1-6K; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 08:32:29 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 12:32:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Denis PILAT Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [cosmetic-patch] missing declaration in monitor.c Message-ID: <20060717123228.GA8764@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Denis PILAT , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <44BB751B.10608@st.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44BB751B.10608@st.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-IsSubscribed: yes 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/msg00200.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 01:31:39PM +0200, Denis PILAT wrote: > monitor_insert_breakpoint and monitor_remove_breakpoint used to be > declared with other static function. Yes, I deliberately removed the prototypes instead of changing them. Did you need them back for a reason? There's no advantage in modern C to prototyping a static function if it is not used before it is defined. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery