From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29839 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2012 14:45:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 29809 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Mar 2012 14:45:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 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, 12 Mar 2012 14:45:07 +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 q2CEj41k026197 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:45:04 -0400 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 q2CEj3Au004639; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:45:03 -0400 Message-ID: <4F5E0BEE.70702@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 14:45:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move catch syscall to inferior-data. References: <1331554677-12906-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <4F5DFF44.5020005@redhat.com> <4F5E049F.5040407@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <4F5E049F.5040407@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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: 2012-03/txt/msg00400.txt.bz2 On 03/12/2012 02:13 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > On 03/12/2012 09:51 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >>>> After trying some different methods, I realize that it is not a good >>>> way to put "DEF_VEC_I(foo)" in header file. >> >> Right. Just put DEF_VEC_I(int) in gdb_vecs.h and include that in >> places that need it. > > Right, gdb_vecs.h can guarantee each DEF_VEC_I is included only once. > IMO, this patch is still beneficial, because inferior.h is de-coupled > from breakpoint.h with this patch applied. It's never completely decoupled as other parts of inferior control need to know about catch syscall, but, patch is okay. -- Pedro Alves