From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20893 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2009 19:14:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 20885 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jul 2009 19:14:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:14:07 +0000 Received: (qmail 20087 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2009 19:14:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 1 Jul 2009 19:14:05 -0000 Message-ID: <4A4BB573.6070008@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:14:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vladimir Prus CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] Remove unimplemented MI commands [Re: Learn function name by its address] References: <8ac60eac0906271144k61bbb6e3sc092d2780dc4192e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00038.txt.bz2 Vladimir Prus wrote: > Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > > >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> >> >>>> I tend to think that if nobody has implemented these in $X years, then >>>> nobody ever will. But then, I'm generally also in the "never comment >>>> out code, just delete it" camp. >>>> >>> So am I. The code is still around, just in CVS instead of inside >>> a comment. Leaving it commented out just creates more clutter that >>> tends to stay rather than being fixed. So I really favor deleting. >>> >> Ok, patch attached. >> > > The code patch is fine. Although at least one of those commands is likely > to be implemented within a year (-break-commands), there's no point to > keep it recognized-but-not-implemented for now. > Also CodeSourcery has a contract to implement MI versions of tracepoint commands, but we might as well start fresh, rather than try to preserve a few lines of ancient code. Stan