From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 49543 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2017 19:50:40 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 49533 invoked by uid 89); 13 Mar 2017 19:50:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*i:sk:179457d, HTo:U*palves, H*f:sk:179457d X-HELO: mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (HELO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) (148.163.156.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:38 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v2DJmpBf084265 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 15:50:38 -0400 Received: from e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.106]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 295st7h1nw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 15:50:37 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:35 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.197) by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.140) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:34 -0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id v2DJoYXX25493656; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:34 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C2AB4C04A; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC7524C040; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc1027705133.ibm.com (unknown [9.152.212.162]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:20 +0000 (GMT) From: Andreas Arnez To: Pedro Alves Cc: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] inf-ptrace: Do not stop memory transfers after a single word References: <1488816060-20776-1-git-send-email-arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1488816060-20776-2-git-send-email-arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <06e5cf43-bb8b-6fa5-7201-414dc88388a3@ericsson.com> <5a22f112-9443-b796-9f34-aee112b63625@ericsson.com> <179457d2-c2aa-dd8d-d9c2-e1d3cca93930@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <179457d2-c2aa-dd8d-d9c2-e1d3cca93930@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:39:29 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 17031319-0040-0000-0000-00000341A248 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17031319-0041-0000-0000-00002480175D Message-Id: X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-03-13_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1703130154 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00199.txt.bz2 On Mon, Mar 13 2017, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 03/10/2017 03:48 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > >> I don't the idea behind that rule. I thought it was just for readability, >> to make it clear that the variable is a pointer without having to refer to the >> declaration. Perhaps some older timers could shed some light on that :). > > I don't know the original rationale, but I agree that nowadays the > justification can only be in terms of readability. The same reason we > do > if (integer_that_is_not_a_boolean != 0) > instead of > if (integer_that_is_not_a_boolean) > . Right, it's a GDB-specific style rule. So who fixes the explanation on the Wiki page? :-) -- Andreas