From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30077 invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2014 20:05:41 -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 30054 invoked by uid 89); 31 Jul 2014 20:05:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 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; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 20:05:32 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E854C1162FA; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:05:30 -0400 (EDT) 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 zfKrXDBIbnAH; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:05:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F233116192; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:05:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6239747740; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 13:05:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 20:33:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Doug Evans Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Delete struct inferior_suspend_state Message-ID: <20140731200529.GG14672@adacore.com> References: <20140731193050.GA7927@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg00834.txt.bz2 > If we're going to keep comments we might as well keep the #if 0'd code > (which is fine by me). > There's no real difference between the two, and the #if 0'd out code > is more descriptive, though I would add a commit (tweak a comment?) so > that the next person will more easily know that the #if 0's are ok. > IWBN to have examples where #if 0 is at least not a bad thing. In my experience, #if 0'ed code has been bit-rotting. Better, IMO, to just be as descriptive as possible in the code, even if that involves naming functions, etc. That way, we can maintain the description a little better. -- Joel