From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 936 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2011 21:17:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 924 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Nov 2011 21:17:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-iy0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-iy0-f169.google.com) (209.85.210.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 21:17:23 +0000 Received: by iaek3 with SMTP id k3so9947268iae.0 for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 13:17:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.197.195 with SMTP id el3mr21396269icb.54.1322428642771; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 13:17:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.186.228 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 13:17:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20111127175910.GD24943@adacore.com> References: <877h2l7nth.fsf@gmail.com> <20111127175910.GD24943@adacore.com> Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 21:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Notes on -Wshadow patches From: Andrey Smirnov To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches , eliz@gnu.org, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, tromey@redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-11/txt/msg00747.txt.bz2 On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Joel Brobecker wr= ote: > Andrey, > >> I finally finished squashing and reordering patches so here are some >> notes, before I start sending them. > > It's really great that you've done all this work of giving us a better > overview of where the various problems lie. =A0It feel a little bad asking > you for more work, Well if it has to be done than it has to be done. I started the whole -Wshadow revolution, I hope I'll be the one finishing it. Besides there's also a chance of guilt-tripping you into accepting -Wshadow by default :-D > but on the othe hand, it would be nice if you said > for each future patch what other entity causes the collision you're > trying to fix. The ones that related to collisions with definitions in platform provided *.h, in other words all non MISC commits, they are grouped and tagged and will have it(tag) in a message subject, there are 90 of those plus there are 34 previously sent patches so I think we have enough to deal with, for now. For all MISC commits, I'll probably add a short description in commit message later. > I presume you already know, and that'll make our job > reviewing your changes a little faster. There are still 195 of them, so oftentimes, I just don't remeber. I have all the data on which type TYP1..TYP4, BWDH, ALBW, they belong, but the exact reason of a clash for MISC commits, no, I don't. I guess I'll remember for some and the others I'll revert and hope gcc will give me clear enough message. Andrey Smirnov