Re: [PATCH 1/7] [python] API for macros: abort or continuing macro iterators.

[Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com>]

matt rice <ratmice@gmail.com> writes:

> diff --git a/gdb/macrocmd.c b/gdb/macrocmd.c
> index d1ac7fa..e929fe0 100644
> --- a/gdb/macrocmd.c
> +++ b/gdb/macrocmd.c
> @@ -220,13 +220,15 @@ info_macro_command (char *name, int from_tty)
>     Otherwise USER_DATA is considered to be a string, printing
>     only macros who's NAME matches USER_DATA.  Other arguments are
>     routed to print_macro_definition.  */
> -static void
> +static enum macro_walk_status
>  print_macro_callback (const char *name, const struct macro_definition *macro,
>  		   struct macro_source_file *source, int line,
>  		   void *user_data)
>  {
>    if (! user_data || strcmp (user_data, name) == 0)
>      print_macro_definition (name, macro, source, line);
> +
> +  return macro_walk_continue;
>  }

Is the unconditional return here due to it being part of a recursive
call chain? I'm not sure what value the unconditional return of an enum
constant over the previous "void" gets us? Why return anything at all?
The previous version assumed the callers knew how to deal with the void
return, but I am not sure what your version achieves by unconditionally
returning macro_walk_continue?

  
>  /* Implementation of the "info definitions" command. */
> @@ -435,7 +437,7 @@ macro_undef_command (char *exp, int from_tty)
>  }
>  
>  
> -static void
> +static enum macro_walk_status
>  print_one_macro (const char *name, const struct macro_definition *macro,
>  		 struct macro_source_file *source, int line,
>  		 void *ignore)
> @@ -452,6 +454,7 @@ print_one_macro (const char *name, const struct macro_definition *macro,
>        fprintf_filtered (gdb_stdout, ")");
>      }
>    fprintf_filtered (gdb_stdout, " %s\n", macro->replacement);
> +  return macro_walk_continue;
>  }

Same as above. If you decide to keep them please update the comment
headers with a description of the return value.  This function,  and
numerous other places too.