From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6401 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2014 12:46:23 -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 6389 invoked by uid 89); 15 Jan 2014 12:46:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:46:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7E4A1166BB; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:46:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id QM82gj98Nifx; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:46:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0C6116516; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:46:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 84923E0816; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:46:17 +0400 (RET) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:46:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: Siva Chandra , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [Patch] PR python/15464 and python/16113 Message-ID: <20140115124617.GK4762@adacore.com> References: <87lhysltqs.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87ppnvziuw.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87ha96y5wa.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ha96y5wa.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00500.txt.bz2 > Siva> Forgot to ask, should this go into 7.7 branch as well? The first patch > Siva> is in 7.7. > > It seems reasonable to me, given that the feature is a bit incomplete > without this patch, but I'd rather defer to Joel for 7.7 decisions. I have no objection in this case, so I'll defer to Tom in return :). The patch is fairly large, in areas where I don't necessarily understand all the repercutions. Hence it is good that Tom's OK with it - so go head, and push to 7.7. By the way, I happened to notice a couple of style violations which I just fixed: + { + const char *field_name = TYPE_FIELD_NAME (type, field); + if (field_name[0] != '\0') + { Empty line after local declaration. + if (ftype == NULL) + { + PyErr_SetString (PyExc_TypeError, + _("'type' attribute of gdb.Field object is not a " + "gdb.Type object.")); + } No need for the curly braces. They are obviously not important for the gdb-7.7 branch, unless you think there is a chance we might touch this code again in the near future, and would want to backport to 7.7. In that case, cherry-picking those two commits on the gdb-7.7 branch would help avoiding patching conflicts... -- Joel