[RFH] F95 expression parser

[RFH] F95 expression parser

[Petr Sorfa]

Hi,

Yet another round of questions (and some attempts to answer them on my
part), but this time concerning my F95 expression parser patch.

1) Should I submit it first to FSF for approval? I assume so.
2) Should a separate branch be created for the F95 support? Currently I
don't think this is necessary. The expression parser doesn't really
touch any of the existing files (except for those needed to register a
new language and Makefile stuff.) The patch only introduces the F95
expression parser, not proper F95 support (so eval.c will be minimally
touched.) True support for F95 is coming in separate patches for more
accurate review/approval by relevant owners. Mainly DWARF and eval
stuff.

Petr

Re: [RFH] F95 expression parser

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain]

> 1) Should I submit it first to FSF for approval? I assume so.

Yes, but there seems to be some confusion here.  Sending work to
"gdb-patches" is the way you send it to the FSF.

> 2) Should a separate branch be created for the F95 support?
> Currently I don't think this is necessary.

I don't think so either, because it's not going to break any
existing code (including F77 code).

Michael C

Re: [RFH] F95 expression parser

[Elena Zannoni]

Michael Elizabeth Chastain writes:
 > > 1) Should I submit it first to FSF for approval? I assume so.
 > 
 > Yes, but there seems to be some confusion here.  Sending work to
 > "gdb-patches" is the way you send it to the FSF.
 > 
 > > 2) Should a separate branch be created for the F95 support?
 > > Currently I don't think this is necessary.
 > 
 > I don't think so either, because it's not going to break any
 > existing code (including F77 code).
 > 
 > Michael C

Maybe look at the gdb-patches archives for how Pierre Muller sumitted
Pascal support? That went pretty smooth.

Elena

Re: [RFH] F95 expression parser

[Jim Blandy]

Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net> writes:
> > 1) Should I submit it first to FSF for approval? I assume so.
> 
> Yes, but there seems to be some confusion here.  Sending work to
> "gdb-patches" is the way you send it to the FSF.

More precisely: the FSF has delegated maintainership of GDB to the GDB
steering committee, which has delegated it to Andrew Cagney.  Andrew
would like you to send your patches to gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com.
The CVS server on sources.redhat.com is the home for the official FSF
GDB sources.