From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12987 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2011 11:26:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 12979 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jan 2011 11:26:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 11:26:14 +0000 Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p0FBNKGH007161; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:23:20 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p0FBNIxm031201; Sat, 15 Jan 2011 12:23:18 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 11:42:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201101151123.p0FBNIxm031201@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: msnyder@vmware.com CC: pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr, pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com In-reply-to: <4D309B82.7070104@vmware.com> (message from Michael Snyder on Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:52:50 -0800) Subject: Re: [RFC-v2] Fix hpux_major_release variable setting References: <000f01cbb401$1093cdc0$31bb6940$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <20110114163035.GQ2504@adacore.com> <000001cbb40b$b03b3020$10b19060$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <201101141757.53748.pedro@codesourcery.com> <000301cbb41a$c115c590$434150b0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <4D309B82.7070104@vmware.com> 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: 2011-01/txt/msg00360.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:52:50 -0800 > From: Michael Snyder > > Pierre Muller wrote: > > Thanks for the feedback to > > Pedro and Joel. > > > > Committed with void added. > > > > Pierre > > > > PS: The nit by Joel was a problem when I sent the patch, > > there are no 4 empty lines, but > > there is a "^L" line, which got lost > > by the way I sent the patch in. > > Does it make sense to remove these ^L characters? > I doubt if anybody prints out these sources any more... To me they serve as logical markers to seperate sections of code. I believe the GNU coding standards already mention that they're meant for that purpose only and not meant for printing source code at all. Using them has always been a matter of taste; I don't see a good reason for going through the code to eliminate them.