From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26662 invoked by alias); 18 Dec 2011 17:24:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 26654 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Dec 2011 17:24:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 17:24:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pBIHONif027755 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 18 Dec 2011 12:24:24 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-60.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.60]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBIHOI8s021428 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 18 Dec 2011 12:24:21 -0500 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 17:57:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Mark Kettenis , brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, pedro@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: Code formatting [Re: [patch] s390*: watchpoints regression [repost]] Message-ID: <20111218172418.GA30764@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20111218115931.GA22952@host2.jankratochvil.net> <201112181352.pBIDq9D0023292@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <83ty4xzusx.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83ty4xzusx.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-12/txt/msg00606.txt.bz2 On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 17:52:30 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Any reasons why no one says anything about the alternative I > suggested? AFAIU, it is free from all the disadvantages mentioned > here. You dropped the important part about "still going through the shell", that was the surprising fact to note there. If you do not drop that shell part of the text the Pedro's text becomes shorter, therefore more clear. Also you just describe /* This is the main thread still going through the shell, or, no watchpoint has been set yet. */ -> /* Nothing else to do if this is the main thread, or if no watchpoints have been set yet. */ additionally the "return" clause there. "return" does not need any comment. Regards, Jan