From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-134543-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 78541 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2016 07:31:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 78516 invoked by uid 89); 4 Nov 2016 07:31:57 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*MI:sk:94eb2c1
X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org
Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (208.118.235.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 07:31:46 +0000
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)	id 1c2YyS-00013a-KI	for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 03:31:45 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46140)	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)	id 1c2YyS-00013S-HU; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 03:31:40 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1986 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)	(Exim 4.82)	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)	id 1c2YyR-0003vr-Pq; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 03:31:40 -0400
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2016 07:31:00 -0000
Message-Id: <83lgwzlmz1.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to:	<CADPb22TETj2o19MZw2GYby1Swe=4RFeT2r1HvKbxfZz8Nv7euQ@mail.gmail.com>	(message from Doug Evans on Thu, 3 Nov 2016 16:54:13 -0700)
Subject: Re: [PATCH, doc RFA] Fix lazy string type docs
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <94eb2c1121f421b06405406923b6@google.com> <83zilgl8zt.fsf@gnu.org> <CADPb22QnnuHuG+sC=rg5HUJP2L_m1P_J7TTFLv0H-KDd6tON=A@mail.gmail.com> <83y410l6wa.fsf@gnu.org> <CADPb22TETj2o19MZw2GYby1Swe=4RFeT2r1HvKbxfZz8Nv7euQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2

> From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 16:54:13 -0700
> Cc: gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> 
> >> Consider char vs wchar_t.
> >> e.g.,
> >> #include <stddef.h>
> >> char foo[] = "bar";
> >> wchar_t wide_foo[] = L"bar";
> >
> > So maybe it would be more clear to say "the type of characters",
> > plural?  And perhaps give an example or two of what types these could
> > be?
> 
> Or how about "the type of an element in the string" ?

Yes, that'd be fine, too.

Thanks.