From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28497 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2009 16:00:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 28471 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2009 16:00:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_SUB_PCT_LETTER X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:00:38 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F84F2BACB0; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:00:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id XCM6rmejsupK; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:00:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D7A82BACAA; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:00:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 356A7F58C1; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:00:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:00:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pierre Muller Cc: 'Pedro Alves' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] ARI fix: %p rule Message-ID: <20090417160031.GV7585@adacore.com> References: <000601c9bf26$50f53740$f2dfa5c0$@u-strasbg.fr> <200904171459.39219.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20090417153651.GS7585@adacore.com> <004d01c9bf74$a23343b0$e699cb10$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <004d01c9bf74$a23343b0$e699cb10$@u-strasbg.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00444.txt.bz2 > In fact we have paddr for > a pointer in target space, so something like > haddr for host_address would be fine for me... Not too keen on you suggestion (sorry!). "p" in my mind was for "print" and "addr" rhymes with CORE_ADDR. That's why I suggested "ptr" instead, to remove the potential confusion. That being said, I'm wondering if we're getting dragged into another bikeshed discussion... I've explained the reasoning behind my suggestions, and I will keep my mouth shut now ;-). -- Joel