From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1119 invoked by alias); 30 Jul 2013 18:11:40 -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 1094 invoked by uid 89); 30 Jul 2013 18:11:40 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from Unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 18:11:39 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6UIBV78001373 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 30 Jul 2013 14:11:31 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-128.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.128]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6UIBT4e001354 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 30 Jul 2013 14:11:29 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: lgustavo@codesourcery.com, "'gdb-patches\@sourceware.org'" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Share more common target structures between gdb and gdbserver References: <51E595A0.6090500@codesourcery.com> <51F7FC4E.3050604@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 18:11:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <51F7FC4E.3050604@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Tue, 30 Jul 2013 18:47:58 +0100") Message-ID: <87mwp3lxym.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: 2013-07/txt/msg00786.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Pedro> I'd very much prefer avoiding "common" in file names, instead Pedro> naming the files for what they contain, not for the fact that they're Pedro> "common" to two programs (gdb, gdbserver) presently. I think of it Pedro> this way -- when we finally end up with only one backend (or one Pedro> backend using a foo-common.c file), I'd rather avoid Pedro> renaming these files to something else, because they're no longer Pedro> "common". Or, yet IOW, think of common/ as a library. Can you Pedro> imagine if all libraries in a distro named their implementation Pedro> files "foo-common.c" ? Because that's what should happen given Pedro> they're used by lots of programs, right? :-) The direction I prefer Pedro> is, when moving things to common/ we take the opportunity to split them Pedro> into smaller, more atomic, leaner units. E.g., that's how we ended up Pedro> with ptid.h/ptid.c, instead of inferior-common.h (or some such). This all makes sense to me. I think it would be best to write this down in the "Common" page of the wiki. We can add other guidelines there too. This will make it simpler for people to work on the commonizing project. Tom