From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11079 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2009 17:32:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 11067 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Dec 2009 17:32:01 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:31:53 +0000 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nB4HVqDc013412 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 12:31:52 -0500 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nB4HVnRZ008305 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 12:31:51 -0500 Message-ID: <4B194785.6090801@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:32:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091014 Fedora/3.0-2.8.b4.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] "Sort" C++ fieldlists References: <4B187211.8070004@redhat.com> <20091204135135.GA4909@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20091204135135.GA4909@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-12/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2 On 12/04/2009 05:51 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > I guess this is OK... it seems nicer not to impose the restriction. > Is it this easy? Wow, talk about trees! Yes, actually it *is* that simple. Or at least none of my testing can prove that your (much) simpler patch is any less effective than my more complicated one. Consider my patch withdrawn! Keith