From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32468 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2009 06:45:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 32458 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jun 2009 06:45:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:45:04 +0000 Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1MKo8M-0002UV-J7 for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:45:02 +0000 Received: from h86-62-88-129.ln.rinet.ru ([86.62.88.129]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:45:02 +0000 Received: from vladimir by h86-62-88-129.ln.rinet.ru with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:45:02 +0000 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Vladimir Prus Subject: Re: [patch] Remove unimplemented MI commands [Re: Learn function name by its address] Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:45:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <8ac60eac0906271144k61bbb6e3sc092d2780dc4192e@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit User-Agent: KNode/0.10.9 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00785.txt.bz2 Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > >>> I tend to think that if nobody has implemented these in $X years, then >>> nobody ever will.  But then, I'm generally also in the "never comment >>> out code, just delete it" camp. >> >> So am I. The code is still around, just in CVS instead of inside >> a comment.  Leaving it commented out just creates more clutter that >> tends to stay rather than being fixed. So I really favor deleting. > > Ok, patch attached. The code patch is fine. Although at least one of those commands is likely to be implemented within a year (-break-commands), there's no point to keep it recognized-but-not-implemented for now. Thanks, Volodya