From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32433 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2009 01:48:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 32365 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Sep 2009 01:48:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 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; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:48:31 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F322F2BABF2; Wed, 9 Sep 2009 21:48:29 -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 IdJ2gkCLADUG; Wed, 9 Sep 2009 21:48:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93FA42BABC0; Wed, 9 Sep 2009 21:48:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 84EA2F589B; Wed, 9 Sep 2009 18:48:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:48:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Eli Zaretskii , mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey Subject: Re: [patch] Fix warnings using gcc-4.5 HEAD Message-ID: <20090910014821.GH20694@adacore.com> References: <20090711082502.GA18801@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <200907110836.n6B8a4Yn015392@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20090711083928.GA30826@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <837hyfy3fv.fsf@gnu.org> <20090711175937.GB18892@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20090908185119.GA10457@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090908185119.GA10457@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> 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: 2009-09/txt/msg00268.txt.bz2 > > I'd like Joel to comment on the Ada changes. > > Hi Joel, pinging for 7.0, this reply is to: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00721.html The Ada part seems fine. I'm left wondering if it really brings much value to have this in a separate file, rather than added directly to enum exp_opcode inside expression.h, especially since other languages are now having visibility on these enumerates. But the the benefits are not obvious either way to me, so let's not worry about this for now. Do you want me to look at the rest of the patch as well, or did someone (Tom?) look at that already? -- Joel