From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8715 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2010 17:13:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 8427 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jul 2010 17:13:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 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, 01 Jul 2010 17:13:06 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B423F2BABDE; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 13:13:04 -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 uNU+LAQQzdiw; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 13:13:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D1E2BABBD; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 13:13:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B0B1BF5895; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 10:12:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:13:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: Pierre Muller , 'Doug Evans' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA]dwarf reader: Avoid complaint on const type Message-ID: <20100701171256.GW2595@adacore.com> References: <41597.7287375883$1274454923@news.gmane.org> <002401cb178c$57428a70$05c79f50$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <201007011808.55025.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201007011808.55025.pedro@codesourcery.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: 2010-07/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 > I hope you're not waiting for me to review this. (Honestly, in cases > like these, I prefer to simply revert the original broken patch, and > then calmly build a new correct patch from scratch. It becomes > much easier to see and understand what was being addressed originaly > instead of having to look at the code in 3D. I've noticed that > people here have revert fobia though ;-) ). Agreed on both counts - we should not be reluctant to revert. -- Joel