From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-64003-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 9512 invoked by alias); 25 May 2009 20:41:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 9504 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2009 20:41:22 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout7.012.net.il (HELO mtaout7.012.net.il) (84.95.2.19)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 May 2009 20:41:17 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout7.012.net.il by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KK700100VX2VT00@i-mtaout7.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 25 May 2009 23:41:14 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.115.215]) by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KK700EDMW4PQL10@i-mtaout7.012.net.il>; Mon, 25 May 2009 23:41:14 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 20:41:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix printing frame arguments for COFF debug info
In-reply-to: <20090525062922.GE23016@adacore.com>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83ws84syok.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <83d4a9q9e5.fsf@gnu.org> <20090520213200.GE16152@adacore.com> <837i0bp2bb.fsf@gnu.org> <20090521170502.GJ16152@adacore.com> <83iqjst89t.fsf@gnu.org> <20090525062922.GE23016@adacore.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
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
X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00566.txt.bz2

> Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 23:29:22 -0700
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> One of the things that you patch does, is also hidding an error that
> was actually an internal error.

Well, using current_language was the old behavior before your change,
so my patch is just falling back on that old behavior.

> We're trying to recover nicely from the situation in order to be
> more useful for the user, so getting rid of the error is OK, but I'd
> probably still emit a complaint.  WDYT?

How about a warning under verbose operation?  Would that be enough?