From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Elena Zannoni , Fernando Nasser , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] arm-tdep.c: deal with failed memory read Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:25:00 -0000 Message-id: <3C054819.30605@cygnus.com> References: <15356.17915.602742.140302@krustylu.cygnus.com> <3BFEB3EB.816139A1@cygnus.com> <3C04615A.7020304@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-11/msg00543.html > The arm-tdep.c part is approved. > > We desperatly need a better naming convention and clearer semantics (what happens if the function fails due to a target disconnect) for these wrapped functions. gdb_*() is being used by both libgdb and wrapper.[hc] et.al. Hmm, this doesn't read very well. Lets try ... gdb.h contains gdb_...() libgdb functions. wrapper.h contains gdb_...() save functions. Two very different interfaces with identical prefixes. I think a separate naming convention needs to be adopted for save / wrapped / ... functions. I also think the function semantics need to be more tightly defined. For instance, a safe function should catch a bad memory read, should that safe function catch a failure because the target interface has gone down (tcp connection lost, ...) or because the user entered a cntrl-c. Anyway, food for thought. enjoy, Andrew From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25947 invoked by alias); 28 Nov 2001 20:25:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25893 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 20:25:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.cygnus.com) (24.114.42.213) by hostedprojects.ges.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 Nov 2001 20:25:06 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.cygnus.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91573DC2; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:24:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3C054819.30605@cygnus.com> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:44:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.3) Gecko/20011020 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Elena Zannoni , Fernando Nasser , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] arm-tdep.c: deal with failed memory read References: <15356.17915.602742.140302@krustylu.cygnus.com> <3BFEB3EB.816139A1@cygnus.com> <3C04615A.7020304@cygnus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00328.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20011117204400.5KHWVltK2-MgOmiv_qwynomYRuxiUennsS03Rj9wCl8@z> > The arm-tdep.c part is approved. > > We desperatly need a better naming convention and clearer semantics (what happens if the function fails due to a target disconnect) for these wrapped functions. gdb_*() is being used by both libgdb and wrapper.[hc] et.al. Hmm, this doesn't read very well. Lets try ... gdb.h contains gdb_...() libgdb functions. wrapper.h contains gdb_...() save functions. Two very different interfaces with identical prefixes. I think a separate naming convention needs to be adopted for save / wrapped / ... functions. I also think the function semantics need to be more tightly defined. For instance, a safe function should catch a bad memory read, should that safe function catch a failure because the target interface has gone down (tcp connection lost, ...) or because the user entered a cntrl-c. Anyway, food for thought. enjoy, Andrew