From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5937 invoked by alias); 5 May 2013 19:44:17 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 5927 invoked by uid 89); 5 May 2013 19:44:17 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Sun, 05 May 2013 19:44:16 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r45JiBHF021198 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 5 May 2013 15:44:12 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-69.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.69]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r45Ji7xX009310 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 5 May 2013 15:44:10 -0400 Date: Sun, 05 May 2013 19:44:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 7.6 released! Message-ID: <20130505194406.GA15079@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <83k3nptk18.fsf@gnu.org> <837gjotnc9.fsf@gnu.org> <20130428073805.GU3525@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130428073805.GU3525@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00086.txt.bz2 On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 09:38:05 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote: > utils.c:throw_perror_with_name doesn't appear to be used anywhere except > in utils.c:perror_with_name, which is nothing more than a wrapper where > errcode is set to GENERIC_ERROR. I am wondering if we want to keep that > function around, or either make the function static, or inline its code > in perror_with_name... > > I'd probably investigate why and when the function was introduced > before making a decision, but I am running out of time for today... throw_perror_with_name was introduced by my 0da462514a01205302e1a34bd9cdfc7bec87b814 and shortly afterwards removed by Pedro's e1680b9894e7e24e37b1fb89c3f3c5cf8f35f13f . While according to the GDB rules the throw_perror_with_name function could be removed now (merged back into perror_with_name) I do not find it completely right, throw_perror_with_name is a logical part in the whole error reporting set and it is only coincidence it has currently no users. This comes from the fact that selective catching of GDB exceptions is used very rarely in GDB as the GDB exceptions are not too easy to use. Jan