Re: [patch 1/9]#2 Rename `enum target_signal' to target_signal_t

Joel Brobecker
2010-09-01T02:03:30Z

> I would prefer gdb_target_signal_t or also gdb_target_signal.
> Is one of those approved?

FWIW: I also prefer gdb_target_signal - Let's avoid _t if POSIX doesn't
like it, and I don't think that the _t brings much anyways.

> Now I probably won't extend target_signal by any new fields (as the logic can
> be kept inside linux-nat.c) so this part remains only as a "code cleanup" to
> better sanity check the types compatibility (by the struct wrapping). There
> have been caught several minor bugs already before and in this patchset.

I will try to have a look at the patch tomorrow, but I agree on
the principle.

--
Joel