From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31981 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2012 10:03:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 31944 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Mar 2012 10:03:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from gbenson.demon.co.uk (HELO gbenson.demon.co.uk) (80.177.220.214) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 10:02:57 +0000 Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 10:03:00 -0000 From: Gary Benson To: Pedro Alves Cc: Doug Evans , Jan Kratochvil , Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, mark@klomp.org Subject: Re: [RFA take 6] Allow setting breakpoints on inline functions (PR 10738) Message-ID: <20120316100253.GA3092@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , Doug Evans , Jan Kratochvil , Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, mark@klomp.org References: <833999wxkt.fsf@gnu.org> <20120315181002.GA10803@redhat.com> <831uotwx2d.fsf@gnu.org> <4F623553.5050204@redhat.com> <83zkbhvhhz.fsf@gnu.org> <20120315184026.GA28322@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120315192931.GA11584@redhat.com> <4F624848.4090503@redhat.com> <4F624BA9.70703@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F624BA9.70703@redhat.com> 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: 2012-03/txt/msg00594.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > On 03/15/2012 07:51 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > > Why don't we just go with "deprecated"? We completely skip the > > "obsolete" ones, and skip the "deprecated" ones, unless the user > > wants them badly. The explanation why they're deprecated belongs > > elsewhere - it doesn't have to be part of the option name... > > > > So picking up one of Gary's previous examples, warnings would > > simply be: > > > > versions < 4: "Skipping obsolete .gdb-index section in %s" > > versions 4,5: "Skipping deprecated .gdb_index section in %s, > > pass --use-deprecated-index-sections to use them anyway" > > More so (cause I know people aren't yet fed up with the bikeshedding > :-) ), if in the future we ever we want to be selective on _which_ > deprecated versions we want to load, we can extend the option to > accept a list of integers, like: > > --use-deprecated-index-sections=7,8 > > From : > > "In the process of authoring computer software, its standards or > documentation, or other technical standards, deprecation is a status > applied to features, characteristics, or practices to indicate that > they should be avoided, typically because they have been superseded. > > Although deprecated software features remain in the software, their > use may raise warning messages recommending alternative practices, > and deprecation may indicate that the feature will be removed in the > future. Features are deprecated - rather than immediately removed - > in order to provide backward compatibility, and give programmers who > have used the feature time to bring their code into compliance with > the new standard." > > Sounds Just Perfect to me. Can this make everyone happy, please? :-) I like it. Cheers, Gary -- http://gbenson.net/