From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-16936-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 10410 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2002 20:09:36 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 10401 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2002 20:09:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 2002 20:09:35 -0000
Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D08C03C03; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 16:09:35 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3D332BFF.6030009@ges.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 13:09:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020708
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch/5.2/commit] Zap __func__
References: <3D32FB89.8030403@ges.redhat.com> <20020715175206.GA19809@nevyn.them.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00339.txt.bz2

> On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 12:42:49PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> Just FYI,
>> 
>> I've committed this to the 5.2 branch - zap more __func__s.  It's brutal 
>> but it works :-)
>> 
>> enjoy,
>> Andrew
> 
> 
>> 2002-07-15  Andrew Cagney  <ac131313@redhat.com>
>> 
>> 	* dwarf2cfi.c: Replace __func__ with "?func?".
> 
> 
> Er, hunh?
> 
> First of all, is there any reason that __FUNCTION__ is not adequately
> portable?  I think it is.  Second of all, if you're going to remove
> __func__ you could at least replace it with the name of the function.

Remember this is a branch and those ``__func__''s were only printed when 
there was an internal_error() - I don't think anyone is going to notice 
:-).  The correct clean fix was committed to the mainline a few hours 
earlier (I looked at back patching it but noticed too many differences).

As for __FUNCTION__, that isn''t part of ISO C 90.

enjoy,
Andrew