Re: [RFA v2 4/6] Expose type alignment on gdb.Type

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 04/27/2018 03:01 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:

>  static struct type *
>  typy_lookup_typename (const char *type_name, const struct block *block)
>  {
> @@ -1410,6 +1432,8 @@ gdbpy_initialize_types (void)
>  
>  static gdb_PyGetSetDef type_object_getset[] =
>  {
> + { "align", typy_get_align, NULL,
> +   "The alignment of this type, in bytes.", NULL },
>   { "code", typy_get_code, NULL,
>     "The code for this type.", NULL },
>   { "name", typy_get_name, NULL,

I thought it a bit odd to call the field "align" (a verb), so
I went to look what we call the "size" field, thinking that
if it were called literally "size", then "align" would be somewhat
consistent (I would then read "align" as shorthand for "alignment").
But, what I found was that we call the size field "sizeof".
So I think it would be more consistent to call the
alignment field "alignof" instead.  Agree?

Otherwise looks fine to me.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves