From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3695 invoked by alias); 6 Aug 2012 19:40:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 3680 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Aug 2012 19:40:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:39:46 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q76JdjFv001215 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 6 Aug 2012 15:39:45 -0400 Received: from psique (ovpn-113-105.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.105]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q76JdgCk003343; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 15:39:43 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Tom Tromey Cc: Goncalo Gomes , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Refactor tdep-i386.c to fix all -Wshadow warnings References: <877gtckskw.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:40:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <877gtckskw.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (Tom Tromey's message of "Mon, 06 Aug 2012 08:23:11 -0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2012-08/txt/msg00196.txt.bz2 On Monday, August 06 2012, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Goncalo" == Goncalo Gomes writes: > > Goncalo> The attached patch fixes all warnings in tdep-i386.c resulting from > Goncalo> enabling shadow warnings in gcc. As this is my first contribution to > Goncalo> GDB, I decided to keep it short to a single file to obtain feedback. > > Just a friendly word of warning -- this is arguably the worst project to > pick of all the things on the project page (though unfortunately there > is more than one stinker on there). It's been attempted a couple of > times, had always lead to a lot of contention, etc. > > That doesn't mean it can't be done, just that you ought to expect it to > be a pain. > > Last time this came up, I think the conclusion was that we'd prefer it > if we could get warnings only for some kinds of shadowing, but not all > kinds. There was a sense that warnings for shadowing of 'index' was not > very useful. I remember some discussion of checking for a GCC change in > gdb's configure, but I don't remember the details any more. They're in > the archives. Thank you for this warning. I have updated the wiki page ProjectIdeas to reflect this. -- Sergio