Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/9] Code cleanup: Drop IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH checks
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 07:32:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <83fw1z6j5i.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130117215846.GC16249@host2.jankratochvil.net>

> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 22:58:46 +0100
> From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
> 
> compare_filenames_for_search did not support IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH search_name and
> therefore all its callers had to handle such case specially.

What code in compare_filenames_for_search would not DTRT with absolute
file names?

>  int
>  compare_filenames_for_search (const char *filename, const char *search_name)
> @@ -171,7 +171,8 @@ compare_filenames_for_search (const char *filename, const char *search_name)
>       to put the "c:file.c" name into debug info.  Such compatibility
>       works only on GDB built for DOS host.  */
>    return (len == search_len
> -	  || IS_DIR_SEPARATOR (filename[len - search_len - 1])
> +	  || (!IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH (search_name)
> +	      && IS_DIR_SEPARATOR (filename[len - search_len - 1]))
>  	  || (HAS_DRIVE_SPEC (filename)
>  	      && STRIP_DRIVE_SPEC (filename) == &filename[len - search_len]));
>  }

I don't understand why the "match up to a slash" rule is now limited
to non-absolute file names.  Perhaps this is related to my first
question above.

Thanks.


  reply	other threads:[~2013-01-18  7:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-01-17 21:59 Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-18  7:32 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2013-01-18 18:39   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-18 19:20     ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-01-18 20:16       ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-18 20:40         ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-01-18 21:53           ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-19  6:50             ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-01-19 14:09               ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-19 15:18                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-01-19 15:27                   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-19 16:02                     ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-01-21 17:06                     ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-21 18:46                       ` Tom Tromey
2013-01-21 19:43                         ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-01-21 20:48                           ` Tom Tromey
2013-01-18 21:11     ` [patch 2/9] Code cleanup: Drop IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH checks [resent] Jan Kratochvil

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=83fw1z6j5i.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox