From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16006 invoked by alias); 25 Feb 2011 18:09:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 15997 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Feb 2011 18:09:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,TW_WT 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; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:09:33 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79DC92BAEF8; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:09:31 -0500 (EST) 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 ah8ciLJEUVQ8; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:09:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B3F42BAEDB; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:09:31 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 50C7F145A56; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 22:09:23 +0400 (RET) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:58:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/18] WTX-TCL support module Message-ID: <20110225180923.GL2495@adacore.com> References: <1298569763-18784-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <1298569763-18784-15-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: 2011-02/txt/msg00775.txt.bz2 Thanks for the review! (it's really late now, for me, but I wanted to give a brief answer) > I guess this explains why the new code isn't part of > --enable-targets=all. I am somewhat concerned that this will lead to > bit-rot. I always build using this option in an attempt to avoid > breaking things; but this code will not be included in that. > > I don't really see a way around it, though, unless you want to > virtualize all the wtx calls. > > I guess I want us to be clear that build breakage for this is expected. I think that's fair. I don't see what kind of virtualization you are proposing that would help with that. Note that we link against the TCL library provided by WindRiver. In all honesty, I didn't really think about using a different TCL, since we didn't need to. The good news is that, in the 5 or 6 years since I wrote the code, I never experienced any breakage (that I can remember!) I'll take care of all the other things you pointed out. > Joel> + add_com ("tcl", class_obscure, tcl_command, > Joel> + _("Evaluate the arguments with the TCL interpreter")); > > I am not super fond of a top-level command named "tcl". I wasn't sure about that. I don't mind changing it. I thought that, since it's another intepreter like Python, it might make sense to put it in the top-level namespace. But I can either make it a subcommand like "wtx tcl", or if you have another command name in mind, let me know. -- Joel