From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 101033 invoked by alias); 20 Mar 2019 17:42:21 -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 101002 invoked by uid 89); 20 Mar 2019 17:42:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=sergio, Sergio, firm, quality X-HELO: mail-wr1-f52.google.com Received: from mail-wr1-f52.google.com (HELO mail-wr1-f52.google.com) (209.85.221.52) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 17:42:17 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-f52.google.com with SMTP id w10so2272230wrm.4 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:42:17 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8a0:f913:f700:56ee:75ff:fe8d:232b? ([2001:8a0:f913:f700:56ee:75ff:fe8d:232b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o20sm3201981wmh.21.2019.03.20.10.42.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC] Sort #includes in gdb To: Tom Tromey References: <87fttfmnpq.fsf@tromey.com> <878sygydob.fsf@tromey.com> <87r2b7viht.fsf@tromey.com> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 17:42:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87r2b7viht.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2019-03/txt/msg00436.txt.bz2 On 03/15/2019 11:13 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > Pedro> ISTR that you could point the bot at some branch instead of a patch? > > Tom> I don't know but I will ask Sergio when he's back. > > I think it can't be done. Isn't that what "try --branch" is for? > > Pedro> No firm opinion on comments vs no comments. > > Tom> For now at least, I'm sticking with "no comments" because the lack of > Tom> comment-handling in the script means that adding comments makes the > Tom> script non-idempotent. But, idempotency is a good quality to have, > Tom> because it means the script can be re-run at any time to fix any > Tom> "regressions" that have crept in. > > I thought about this some more and I went back and implemented limited > comment-scanning, to make this work. I think this is nicer because it > provides an in-source guide to developers saying where to add a new > #include. > > I've appended the relevant bits from the rewritten objfiles.c. > > Let me know what you think. Seems fine to me. BTW, I noticed that the ChangeLog said "Sort headers." twice for every entry. Thanks, Pedro Alves