From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1848 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2010 12:33:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 1827 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Apr 2010 12:33:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=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, 22 Apr 2010 12:33:10 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48872BACE5; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 08:33:08 -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 w71V4UJobQ04; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 08:33:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B08622BAD08; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 08:33:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5992BF5895; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 05:33:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:33:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Chris Moller , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Do not treat '\' as escape character on MinGW Windows hosts Message-ID: <20100422123308.GA12680@adacore.com> References: <20100421203354.GD6588@adacore.com> <20100421220828.GA19620@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20100422001714.GD19194@adacore.com> <20100422023421.GA20111@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20100422103718.GG19194@adacore.com> <4BD03906.5090109@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BD03906.5090109@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-04/txt/msg00747.txt.bz2 > >Understood, and it's not obvious to me that you'll be outvoted. This > >is why I am asking for comments more than a review at this point. > >I would like to challenge the "workaround" term, though :-P. I much as > >I dislike Windows (and believe me, I really dislike this platform), > >I think that if we are going to support Windows, > > That, then, is the fundamental question. Certainly, Windows support > adds to code complexity, which is always a bad thing. Let's imagine that we have a bug in the software, can we reasonably tell the user that his bug will not be fixed because the fix complexifies the code? To a Windows user, not being able to use backslashes in paths is a bug! -- Joel