From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19675 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2007 23:03:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 19666 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jan 2007 23:03:41 -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; Fri, 12 Jan 2007 23:03:35 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H5VQr-0001qM-B3; Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:03:33 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 23:03:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: async patch (no. 4) Message-ID: <20070112230333.GA7039@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17720.29835.230422.776965@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20070112183120.GB30005@nevyn.them.org> <17832.2690.298735.867020@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17832.2690.298735.867020@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00324.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 11:24:02AM +1300, Nick Roberts wrote: > > A problem I run into often at work is that when you try to merge > > another person's work, you often don't know how every bit of it works. > > But in order to review it, you've really got to figure out each > > line of it. I try to read every line of my patch and ask myself > > why that line is right / necessary. > > You're not looking at the last patch, which is smaller, that I sent: > > Re: [PATCH] PR mi/2077 "set edit off" breaks MI" > (Tue, 21 Nov 2006 11:20:41 +1300) Whoops! Thanks. Well, let this be a reminder to both of us to put things in their own threads :-) I'll look at that one instead. I thought the other one was newer. Thanks. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery