From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29224 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2012 13:48:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 29214 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Nov 2012 13:48:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_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; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 13:48:38 +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 qAEDmaGL025660 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:48:37 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAEDmZmf029342; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:48:35 -0500 Message-ID: <50A3A132.3060409@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 13:48:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121029 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: Michael Eager , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Multi-process + multi-arch: GDB References: <20121109015149.13597.39322.stgit@brno.lan> <87lieaeisb.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <509D4BCA.6020704@redhat.com> <87haoyeiev.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <509D4FC9.2060208@redhat.com> <877gpuegsb.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <509E800E.9030702@eagerm.com> <87vcd95isk.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87vcd95isk.fsf@fleche.redhat.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: 2012-11/txt/msg00364.txt.bz2 On 11/13/2012 08:50 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Eager writes: > > Michael> I'd recommend get_target_arch() rather than recasting > Michael> target_gdbarch from a variable to a function. There are other > Michael> get_target_* () functions and this would parallel that usage. > Michael> Another benefit: a more substantive change in the name is less > Michael> likely to be overlooked when adapting or backporting patches. > > In this particular case, I don't think there are big problems that can > arise. target_gdbarch isn't used as a boolean, one of the major such > issues that can possibly arise. Other issues, I think, will be caught > by type-checking. I agree problems aren't likely. > That said, I don't really care all that much about the name, and if > Pedro agrees I will rename it to something else. I don't care about it that much myself either. Renaming it to get_target_arch is of course fine with me, having proposed it myself originally, if someone wants to do the work. -- Pedro Alves