From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 398EA386EC42 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:34:23 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 398EA386EC42 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.193] (unknown [192.222.164.54]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2BCC71E581; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:34:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Make gdbarch.sh shellcheck-clean To: Tom Tromey , Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Cc: Simon Marchi References: <20200428214655.3255454-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <878sie57an.fsf@tromey.com> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <671ce996-8de0-a21d-b11d-91052c3d4f9b@simark.ca> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:34:21 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <878sie57an.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: tl Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 00:34:24 -0000 On 2020-04-29 5:08 p.m., Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches writes: > > Simon> I ran shellcheck on gdbarch.sh and addressed all the warnings. It > Simon> didn't catch anything serious, but I think it's good to have it clean > Simon> anyway, so we can catch potential problems in future changes we do to > Simon> this file. > > These all seemed fine to me. Thanks, I'll push it. > I'd like to see gdbarch.sh eventually go away entirely. > Most of it could be ordinary C++ code. I don't have a concrete plan for > this though. Mostly I've been reluctant to do it due to the amount of > reindentation that will probably be involved, though I guess maybe I > could write an emacs lisp script to handle this. I think that gdbarch.sh will go away eventually too, but probably not soon, so I thought it would still be worth it to do this work. Even if you don't plan to do it, if you have ideas of how we could do the equivalent in pure C++, it would be nice if you could spell them out somewhere. I think about this some times, but I don't have a clear picture of how the result could look like. Simon