From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27242 invoked by alias); 23 May 2011 19:57:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 27231 invoked by uid 22791); 23 May 2011 19:57:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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; Mon, 23 May 2011 19:56:57 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4NJuu9H007200 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 15:56:56 -0400 Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4NJuslS014678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 23 May 2011 15:56:56 -0400 Message-ID: <4DDABC06.1040208@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 19:57:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110307 Fedora/3.1.9-0.38.b3pre.fc13 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: The future of dwarf2_physname References: <4DD44983.7060406@redhat.com> <20110523131659.GA30344@host1.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: 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: 2011-05/txt/msg00542.txt.bz2 On 05/23/2011 12:52 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I suggest something like the appended, on top of Keith's patches and > your patch. The idea here is to prefer the fast path, but have a debug > setting so we can easily do physname checking. > > WDYT? I didn't run it through the test suite or anything yet. I know this question was for Jan, but I just wanted to chime in here and say that I was going to propose/do exactly the same thing. I'm all for it. Keith