From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12071 invoked by alias); 3 Nov 2010 00:04:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 12062 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Nov 2010 00:04:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 00:04:32 +0000 Received: (qmail 15040 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2010 00:04:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 3 Nov 2010 00:04:30 -0000 Message-ID: <4CD0A70A.6030306@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 00:04:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [doc RFA] Use of FIXME, TODO, etc. in new code is prohibited. References: <20101102163706.300142461AE@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> In-Reply-To: <20101102163706.300142461AE@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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: 2010-11/txt/msg00055.txt.bz2 On 11/2/10 9:37 AM, Doug Evans wrote: > > +The use of @code{FIXME} and all similar comments in new code is prohibited. > +The rule is to not write code that requires them. I think there are a couple flavors of FIXME notes that we need to distinguish. The first is an obvious but easily-fixed limitation; fixed-size buffer, not checking a return result, and the like. It seems good for software quality that we make people fix those kinds of problems at submission time. The other kind of FIXME is an enhancement idea that comes to mind while working on a patch, but that is out of scope. Maybe you notice that a routine could be shared between GDB and GDBserver, or that an argument to a target vector method is now redundant. We have a rule discouraging multi-change patches, and a volunteer's time might be insufficient for a separate followon patch. In such a case we should record the idea *somewhere* - major design changes might be wiki fodder, but the body of the code seems like the right place for lesser worthwhile changes. We could just recommend adding the note in running text, but a special marker helps it stand out. Stan