From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9271 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2009 15:16:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 9258 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Oct 2009 15:16:01 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:15:56 +0000 Received: (qmail 2756 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2009 15:15:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 14 Oct 2009 15:15:55 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Joel Brobecker Subject: Re: [v8] multi-executable support Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:16:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200910051659.20885.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200910131440.48021.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20091014030310.GR5272@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20091014030310.GR5272@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200910141615.57994.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00302.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 14 October 2009 04:03:10, Joel Brobecker wrote: > I like the UI, and the concepts behind it. I did a careful reading of > the introductory comment in progspace.h and it's great that you took > the time to provide such a detailed introduction. I'm planning on > extending it to discuss the VxWorks case :-). > Great! > Just a few nits: There is at least one location where I noticed some > "#if 0"'ed code, and I just told one of the contributors that we'd > like to avoid this sort of thing. Can it be removed, or should we > really be keeping that piece of commented out code. We usually use > FIXMEs instead. Ah, yeah, I'll drop that for now. > > In the documentation: > > +(@value{GDBP}) clone-inferior > +Added inferior 2. > +1 inferiors added. > > This is really nit-picking, but when adding 1 inferior, should we have > a special message that does not say "inferiors" (plural). I usually > don't care much about this sort of detail, but for some reason, it > seems to matter to me in this case. Any suggestions? Assuming languages have only singular and one plural form [if (n == 1) else ...] is frowned uppon as well. "1 inferior(s) added." ? "Added 1 inferior(s)." ? Just drop the sentence? > Just a personal request: If you commit the patch before Saturday, > could you just give me a heads up. I just want to make sure that > I can get a checkout of the sources before you apply your patch. > I think that the patch is going to break our VxWorks port, and I think > that fixing it will require a bit of thoughts and time. Oh. Don't hesitate to ask if you have any question. I hope the models can be matched without much trouble. > So if I can > do a resync of the AdaCore sources up to before your patch, that'll > give me a little more time. Sure, no problem. -- Pedro Alves