From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12726 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2003 20:54:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12714 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2003 20:54:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.187.230.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Nov 2003 20:54:43 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC8C02B90; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:54:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FC5130F.5060902@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:54:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] Deprecate remaining STREQ uses References: <3FC119EB.1060102@gnu.org> <3FC234C0.1000500@gnu.org> <20031124165047.GA2227@nevyn.them.org> <9003-Mon24Nov2003213315+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> <3FC262DE.5080308@gnu.org> <20031124210622.GK857@gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00595.txt.bz2 >> BTW, coff (not xcoff) support which is where (ignoring ada, hi joel) > > > I will take care of removing all STREQ* usage from our ada-specific > files. This update will then be contributed when we are finally ready to > merge our sources into your tree. Thanks. You'll see that I tweaked the ARI so that it doesn't include ada. > Note, this raise another question: I consider that the Ada experience > that we started a year ago (or maybe even longer) has failed. Since > then, the ada-specific files tend to suffer from bitrot, and I presume > that they also sometimes cause a small maintenance overhead when large > changes such as this one are done. Shouldn't it make better sense to > simply remove this file for now? It can be added back when we deliver. I think having the code there is still helpful. It gave other developers some context, for instance when recently studying PaulH's expression changes. It also lets us see the problems that are heading our way (that thread stuff :-). enjoy, Andrew