From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24033 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2008 21:58:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 24001 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jan 2008 21:58:24 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:58:00 +0000 Received: (qmail 31398 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2008 21:57:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (jimb@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 17 Jan 2008 21:57:59 -0000 To: "Rob Quill" Cc: msnyder@specifix.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: New scope checking patch References: From: Jim Blandy Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:58:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Rob Quill's message of "Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:11:01 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-01/txt/msg00461.txt.bz2 "Rob Quill" writes: > On 17/01/2008, Jim Blandy wrote: >> Also, please be sure that the indentation follows the GNU coding >> conventions. Substatements should be indented by two spaces. >> (c-exp.y is not a great place to look for examples, since it's a mess, >> but look at, say, frame.c.) >> >> From looking at your patch as it arrived through my mailer, it seemed >> that the code block for the new $in_scope grammar rule was not >> indented in the same way as the other blocks. These should all be >> consistent. > > Hey, > > Sorry about getting the formatting consistently wrong. I've > reformatted it and it looks to me like it matches the other cases, > although it is hard to tell where to use tabs and where to use spaces, > and I'm never sure it's right as what if I have a different tab size > to you etc. I tried putting it through indent, but that just made a > mess, although as a rule is it OK to use that if it is a C file? I'm told Open Source projects avoid tabs, but it seems that GDB permits them, with tab stops every 8 columns. The GNU coding standards don't say much about tab use or width, beyond saying that error messages that include line and column numbers should assume tab stops every 8 columns when computing column numbers. We don't generally use indent; if you look through the mailing list archives, you can see the arguments. I can only remember the arguments that made sense to me, so I'm not sure I can accurately explain the reasoning. :) If you use GNU Emacs C mode with the default settings, then TAB, C-j, and C-M-q will do the right thing. > + if (!have_full_symbols () && !have_partial_symbols ()) > + error ("No symbol table is loaded. Use the \"file\" command."); Too much indentation? > + > + /* Otherwise, prepare to write out the value */ > + int_type = builtin_type (current_gdbarch)->builtin_int; > + write_exp_elt_opcode (OP_LONG); > + write_exp_elt_type (int_type); > + > + min_symbol = > + lookup_minimal_symbol (copy_name($3.stoken), NULL, NULL); > + if ($3.sym || min_symbol) > + write_exp_elt_longcst ((LONGEST) 1); > + else > + write_exp_elt_longcst ((LONGEST) 0); > + > + write_exp_elt_opcode (OP_LONG); } Closing brace should get its own line, since the opening brace did. > @@ -1678,6 +1704,9 @@ yylex () > /* Catch specific keywords. Should be done with a data structure. */ > switch (namelen) > { > + case 9: > + if (strncmp (tokstart, "$in_scope", 9) == 0) > + return IN_SCOPE; > case 8: > if (strncmp (tokstart, "unsigned", 8) == 0) > return UNSIGNED; When I view this (again, with 8-column tab stops), the 'case' is not lined up with the other cases, and the 'return' is not indented two spaces within the 'if'.