From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25503 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2010 10:46:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 25494 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jan 2010 10:46:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 Jan 2010 10:46:14 +0000 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NRNyP-00083A-09; Sun, 03 Jan 2010 05:46:13 -0500 From: Eli Zaretskii To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20100103053213.GA2788@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Sun, 3 Jan 2010 09:32:13 +0400) Subject: Re: [RFA/i387] improve the output of 'info float' (was: "Re: gdb-patch mailing list") Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4B3E4DC6.7020901@cyberfiber.org> <20100102043704.GR548@adacore.com> <4B3F03C4.1040104@cyberfiber.org> <4B3F083C.2080300@cyberfiber.org> <20100102093213.GX2788@adacore.com> <20100102093302.GA12123@adacore.com> <4B3F252A.30504@cyberfiber.org> <20100102111708.GV548@adacore.com> <4B3F3442.60900@cyberfiber.org> <20100103053213.GA2788@adacore.com> Message-Id: Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2010 10:46:00 -0000 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 09:32:13 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > + /* Precision */ > > + fprintf_filtered (file, "%s ", (status & 0x0020) ? "PE" : " "); > > + /* Underflow */ > > + fprintf_filtered (file, "%s ", (status & 0x0010) ? "UE" : " "); > > + /* Overflow */ > > + fprintf_filtered (file, "%s ", (status & 0x0008) ? "OE" : " "); > > + /* Zero Devide */ > > + fprintf_filtered (file, "%s ", (status & 0x0004) ? "ZE" : " "); > > + /* Denormalized operand */ > > + fprintf_filtered (file, "%s ", (status & 0x0002) ? "DE" : " "); > > + /* Invalid operation */ > > + fprintf_filtered (file, "%s ", (status & 0x0001) ? "IE" : " "); > > I personally think that the added comments are overkill, but I'm > otherwise OK with them. Mark might have a different opinion on this. I'm not Mark, but how exactly are these comments overkill? Unless someone knows by heart the bits in the x87 FP Status word, or can decipher the two-letter abbreviations without consulting the Intel manuals, I'd say they add significantly to the readability of the source code. However, these comments need to be formatted according to coding standards, as in /* Denormalized operand. */ (i.e. ended with a period and 2 spaces), and also proofread for typos, like this one: > > + /* Zero Devide */