From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10051 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2012 17:19:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 10043 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2012 17:19:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_BG,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, 16 Jan 2012 17:19:34 +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 q0GHJWWw013268 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:19:32 -0500 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 q0GHJWEE003663; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:19:32 -0500 Received: from barimba (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 q0GHJU0R020965; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:19:30 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Keith Seitz , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] [4/4] Remove libgdb API (gdb.h & doc) References: <4F108D23.5050803@redhat.com> <83d3amk7ws.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:24:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <83d3amk7ws.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:25:23 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2012-01/txt/msg00555.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: Eli> I admit I don't really understand where all this is going. We are Eli> not removing libgdb itself, are we? No. Eli> If we are not removing libgdb, but only gdb.h, then I have 2 Eli> questions: Eli> . Why does it make sense to remove gdb.h, if the library is going to Eli> stay? gdb.h declares a few wrappers that follow a different exception convention from the rest of gdb. However, there aren't enough of these wrappers to actually interface any client program with the rest of gdb; clients in practice will have to use the other exception handling mechanism. So, at present this stuff serves to obfuscate more than help. Also, I don't think anybody is going to, or should, work on extending this interface. So, removing this is a cleanup. It helps make gdb more regular. Tom