From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11899 invoked by alias); 3 May 2005 14:43:48 -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 11868 invoked from network); 3 May 2005 14:43:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 3 May 2005 14:43:41 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j43EhfeZ013926 for ; Tue, 3 May 2005 10:43:41 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j43EhfO07547; Tue, 3 May 2005 10:43:41 -0400 Received: from [172.16.50.58] (vpn50-58.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.58]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j43EheDF012140; Tue, 3 May 2005 10:43:40 -0400 Message-ID: <42778DE6.1080106@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 14:43:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-1 (X11/20050323) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] Use bfd_byte in value.h References: <42710E90.3030300@gnu.org> <200504281919.j3SJJKF1011501@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <42715EE8.5070704@gnu.org> <01c54c8a$Blat.v2.4$ffbe8140@zahav.net.il> <42753958.70109@gnu.org> <01c54e92$Blat.v2.4$5cf24460@zahav.net.il> <42755FD4.8000009@gnu.org> <01c54f4a$Blat.v2.4$a9fc8500@zahav.net.il> In-Reply-To: <01c54f4a$Blat.v2.4$a9fc8500@zahav.net.il> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2 ... and such debate belongs on gdb@. Presumably Mark will respond to your proposal. Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 19:01:40 -0400 >>From: Andrew Cagney >>CC: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com >> >>The suggestion of gdb_byte was yours, so it rightfully falls to you to >>propose more formally on gdb@ (I certaintly don't want to jump in and >>steal your thunder). Can we finally do that? > > > I will happily do whatever it takes, but I'm unsure what you want me > to say there. That I propose to replace "char *" with "gdb_byte *"? > Somehow, I doubt that this is all you read into ``propose formally''. > But if all you are asking is to start a thread on gdb@, I'll do this. > > In any case, I think Mark's question (why not use "void *") is > something that we should discuss first, since if we accept his > recommendation, there will be no need to introduce a new data type. >