Re: one week to gdb-7.6 release?

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>]

> > I think that the standard approach in this case would be to define
> > a function in utils.h, and have its implementation in both posix-hdep.c
> > and mingw-hdep.c.
> 
> What would the implementation in posix-hdep.c look like?  Just return
> its argument, xstrdup'ed?

That would be a good start indeed. We could possibly think of testing
that the argument is an absolute path and then apply an xfullpath on
it if not, but we'd be taking a risk of causing a change in behavior.
What I would do is add a comment inside the posix implementation that
the current use of this function is such that returning a copy of
the argument is sufficient. That way, someone finding that the function
finally needs to be implemented will understand the history.

> > A minor nitpick on coding style: Can you add an empty line between
> > the comment documenting a function ands its definition?
> 
> I don't mind, but this style is not uniformly used in the sources.
> Quite a few places don't leave that empty line.  (I'm accustomed to
> the latter, which is why I used that.)

I understand where you are coming from. This is based on a discussion
we had on this, and we decided to standardize on the former. It really
does not matter to me either way, but I try to help us improve our
consistency...

-- 
Joel