From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15788 invoked by alias); 7 May 2013 15:26:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 15776 invoked by uid 89); 7 May 2013 15:26:34 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 May 2013 15:26:33 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r47FQVbX017548 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 7 May 2013 11:26:31 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-163.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.163]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r47FQUCi026942 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 7 May 2013 11:26:30 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Assert leftover cleanups in TRY_CATCH References: <20130501165750.GA453@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87obcoyot3.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130507062305.GH5278@adacore.com> <87ip2uvonz.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 15:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87ip2uvonz.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (Tom Tromey's message of "Tue, 07 May 2013 08:40:32 -0600") Message-ID: <877gjavmje.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00240.txt.bz2 Tom> Alternatively I think we could probably change all the code to be Tom> cleanup-checker-clean. I'll try to prep that series soon to see what Tom> people think. I think it actually less work. Actually, I forgot how hard this is. There are some tricky cases -- e.g., try to remove the dangling cleanup from c-exp.y:operator_stoken, or from ada-lang.c:old_renaming_is_invisible. Or, there is some spaghetti code, like disasm.c:do_mixed_source_and_assembly. And, there is some code where I don't know what is intended, like record-full.c:record_full_wait_1 (multiple returns without cleaning up), or record-btrace.c:record_btrace_insn_history. So, getting to zero complaints from the checker is not easy. Maybe I will hack the checker to ignore some issues. Tom