From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8347 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2011 20:51:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 8338 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Mar 2011 20:51:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,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, 28 Mar 2011 20:51:29 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p2SKpLL0022372 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 28 Mar 2011 16:51:21 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2SKpK5A011239; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 16:51:20 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2SKpJ4K013308; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 16:51:20 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id ACD93378BE8; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:51:19 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [unavailable regs/locals, 01/11] registers status upwards References: <201102221327.51130.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20110228155325.GB7881@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201103160012.50971.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20110317150627.GA15201@host1.jankratochvil.net> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:17:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20110317150627.GA15201@host1.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:06:28 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2011-03/txt/msg01149.txt.bz2 I read this thread today. A bit late, I know, but since it impacts post-7.3 work (I hope :-) I would like to bring it up. Jan> In such case these functions should be `warn_unused_result' and Jan> they should be renamed from the original functions. The original Jan> function names should throw an exception (for the case of infcall Jan> etc.) - if any code should be handled directly by the Jan> callers the original function names can even internal_error on Jan> values. If I read correctly, we're all in agreement about this as a long term goal. Jan> I wanted to express general disagreement with this style expecting Jan> preciseness and no mistakes by the developers, which is not Jan> considered to be a "safe enterprise development style". I think we generally agree about this too. My understanding is that the code in 7.3 is at least as robust as gdb-before-the-series-was-applied. That is, the changes were, if not "fail-safe", at least "fail-compatibly". Pedro, are you planning to implement the API changes post-7.3? If not, could you file a bug report about it? Tom