From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>,
Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>,
Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 033/238] [misc.] breakpoint.c: -Wshadow fix
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 11:25:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111205112523.GJ2777@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1322493153-29512-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
> Cause:
> Variable in the inner scope shadowed by variable from outer
> one(defined at the beginning of function.
[...]
> diff --git a/gdb/breakpoint.c b/gdb/breakpoint.c
> index 1a4974c..69a8782 100644
> --- a/gdb/breakpoint.c
> +++ b/gdb/breakpoint.c
> @@ -10667,8 +10667,8 @@ update_global_location_list (int should_insert)
> {
> /* ALL_BP_LOCATIONS bp_location has LOC->OWNER always
> non-NULL. */
> - struct breakpoint *b = loc->owner;
> struct bp_location **loc_first_p;
> + b = loc->owner;
>
> if (b->enable_state == bp_disabled
> || b->enable_state == bp_call_disabled
I looked at it, and it looks fine from a functional point of view.
However, I'd rather have Jan or Pedro, who have modified this function
more often than I have, to weigh in.
Personally, I'm not keen on the fact that a global variable is reused
in the context of a local loop. So I would rather rename the local
variable inside the loop rather than delete the local variable,
and reuse the global one. It makes for a bigger patch, but I think
it's better in the end.
--
Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-05 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-22 13:25 [PATCH 33/348] Fix -Wsahdow warnings Andrey Smirnov
2011-11-22 19:11 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-28 15:13 ` [PATCH 033/238] [misc.] breakpoint.c: -Wshadow fix Andrey Smirnov
2011-12-05 11:25 ` Joel Brobecker [this message]
2011-12-05 13:05 ` Andrey Smirnov
2011-12-05 13:17 ` Pedro Alves
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111205112523.GJ2777@adacore.com \
--to=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=pedro@codesourcery.com \
--cc=tromey@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox