From: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
To: Pedro Alves via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>,
Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Make gdbarch.sh shellcheck-clean
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 10:55:35 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871rnqmmwo.fsf@tromey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <94e06111-2801-644f-3906-7c622d1ec611@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves via Gdb-patches's message of "Sun, 10 May 2020 19:57:09 +0100")
>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
Pedro> My main gripe with gdbarch.sh is that the function/variable/method definitions
Pedro> and the generator code is all in the same file.
Pedro> If those were split to separate files, like, the definitions inside function_list()
Pedro> were moved to a separate gdbarch.def file, which would be read by gdbarch.sh,
Pedro> that'd already be a large win, IMHO.
Pedro> Also, I would like it to be able to generate the gdbarch.h/c files in place,
Pedro> instead of generating new "new-gdbarch.h/c" files.
Another option would be to go with a .def-style file, but using #include
and #define to turn it into C++ code, like we do with other files.
There's basically two things I don't like about the current setup.
One problem is that the current code is hard to read. Any of the ideas
we've discussed would fix this.
The other problem is not just that the output files are new-gdbarch.[ch]
-- that can be fixed with a simple script tweak -- but that the script
has to be run manually to update & commit the output. This bites me
occasionally; it would be preferable by far if it were simply integrated
into the build in a normal way.
This latter thing is a problem with make-target-delegates as well,
though I touch that one a lot less often, so it doesn't irritate as
much.
Tom
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-11 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-28 21:46 Simon Marchi
2020-04-28 21:46 ` [PATCH 1/7] gdb: fix shellcheck warnings SC2059 (variables in printf format string) in gdbarch.sh Simon Marchi
2020-04-28 21:46 ` [PATCH 2/7] gdb: fix shellcheck warnings SC2086 (missing double quotes) " Simon Marchi
2020-04-28 21:46 ` [PATCH 3/7] gdb: fix shellcheck warnings SC2006 (use $() instead of ``) " Simon Marchi
2020-04-28 21:46 ` [PATCH 4/7] gdb: fix shellcheck warnings SC2166 (&& and !! instead of -a and -o) " Simon Marchi
2020-04-28 21:46 ` [PATCH 5/7] gdb: fix shellcheck warnings SC2034 (unused variable) " Simon Marchi
2020-04-28 21:46 ` [PATCH 6/7] gdb: fix shellcheck warnings SC2154 (referenced but not assigned) " Simon Marchi
2020-04-28 21:46 ` [PATCH 7/7] gdb: silence shellcheck warning SC2162 (use read -r) " Simon Marchi
2020-04-29 21:08 ` [PATCH 0/7] Make gdbarch.sh shellcheck-clean Tom Tromey
2020-04-30 0:34 ` Simon Marchi
2020-04-30 14:25 ` Tom Tromey
2020-04-30 15:48 ` Simon Marchi
2020-05-07 1:59 ` Tom Tromey
2020-05-10 18:57 ` Pedro Alves
2020-05-10 21:36 ` Simon Marchi
2020-05-11 16:55 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
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=871rnqmmwo.fsf@tromey.com \
--to=tom@tromey.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=simon.marchi@efficios.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