From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32688 invoked by alias); 14 Jul 2008 17:46:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 32679 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jul 2008 17:46:37 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:46:19 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m6EHjsp9031419 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:45:54 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m6EHjrFY027643; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:45:53 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-10-24.bos.redhat.com [10.16.10.24]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m6EHjrWR001447; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:45:53 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 9CFFD37814C; Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:45:52 -0600 (MDT) To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Patch: annotations -vs- deprecated hooks References: <20080714172649.GD3998@adacore.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: Tom Tromey X-Attribution: Tom Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:46:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20080714172649.GD3998@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Mon\, 14 Jul 2008 10\:26\:49 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (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: 2008-07/txt/msg00288.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: Joel> I agree - I didn't check why gdbtk is dependent on annotation hooks, Joel> but we should also ask them about it, and try to remove these hooks. I don't know why this notification was hacked into annotate.c -- but no matter. These notifications could easily be replaced with observers. I did not do that because it is not clear to me that we actually want to directly replace all the deprecated hooks with observers. Some of these calls appear in weird places; maybe a more generally useful observer could be added instead. Tom