From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16769 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2014 15:40:06 -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 16756 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jul 2014 15:40:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 17 Jul 2014 15:40:03 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s6HFdxuW022108 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 17 Jul 2014 11:40:00 -0400 Received: from blade.nx (ovpn-116-35.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.35]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s6HFdwOZ020177; Thu, 17 Jul 2014 11:39:59 -0400 Received: by blade.nx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EAC162640C7; Thu, 17 Jul 2014 16:39:57 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 16:03:00 -0000 From: Gary Benson To: Pedro Alves Cc: Doug Evans , gdb-patches , Tom Tromey Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15 v3] Introduce common/errors.h Message-ID: <20140717153957.GA1921@blade.nx> References: <1405520243-17282-1-git-send-email-gbenson@redhat.com> <1405520243-17282-2-git-send-email-gbenson@redhat.com> <20140717134728.GB31916@blade.nx> <53C7E6AB.4080703@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53C7E6AB.4080703@redhat.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg00470.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > On 07/17/2014 02:47 PM, Gary Benson wrote: > > +/* Throw an error. The current operation will be aborted. The > > + message will be issued to the user. The application will > > + return to a state where it is accepting commands from the user. */ > > These comments aren't really true, though. We have plenty of places > catching errors with TRY_CATCH and proceeding without returning to a > state where we're accepting commands from the user. How about "Throw an error. The current operation will be aborted. The application may catch and process the error, or, if not, the message will be issued to the user and the application will return to a state where it is accepting commands from the user." > (We should really bite the bullet and move exceptions.{h|c} and > cleanups.{h|c} to common/ and make gdbserver use them too.) Can I leave this for another series please? This one's big enough already. Thanks, Gary -- http://gbenson.net/