From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29024 invoked by alias); 7 May 2013 14:27:09 -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 29014 invoked by uid 89); 7 May 2013 14:27:09 -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 14:27:08 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r47ER6BU029881 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 7 May 2013 10:27:06 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-163.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.163]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r47ER4br020929 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 7 May 2013 10:27:05 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Pedro Alves Subject: Re: [RFA 3/3] Avoid duplicating text in sol-thread.c:info_cb References: <518284AF.5090802@redhat.com> <1367929532-4849-4-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 14:27:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1367929532-4849-4-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Tue, 7 May 2013 08:25:32 -0400") Message-ID: <87vc6uvpaf.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/msg00223.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: Joel> * sol-thread.c (info_cb): Factorize the code a little. Joel> Same as patch #2, I could probably self-approve, but there could be Joel> merit in the current approach if the output was thought to one day Joel> become different depending on some (future) factors... I wouldn't worry about it. It's trivial to change back if someone should need to. Tom