From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23890 invoked by alias); 30 Jan 2012 11:53:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 23881 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Jan 2012 11:53:32 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 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, 30 Jan 2012 11:53:12 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0UBr0Wh022389 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 06:53:00 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0UBqwl9007906; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 06:52:59 -0500 Message-ID: <4F26849A.1050005@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:58:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA/commit] Rename la_get_symbol_name_match_p into la_get_symbol_name_cmp References: <1327906522-19961-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <20120130070053.GA5994@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120130071346.GC31383@adacore.com> <4F267E1A.7000409@redhat.com> <20120130113616.GD31383@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20120130113616.GD31383@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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: 2012-01/txt/msg00985.txt.bz2 On 01/30/2012 11:36 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> Did you consider keeping the name, but reverse the return logic to >> be what one would expect instead (return true/false for match)? > > I did. But the cost is that we cannot use strcmp* as default matching > routines. We end up needing a wrapper, which isn't great and also > costs us an extra function call. Okay. Not sure whether the wrapper/call makes a real difference, but in any case, la_get_symbol_name_cmp makes sense and looks fine to me. (I find "no_match" confusing.) -- Pedro Alves