From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30608 invoked by alias); 14 Jul 2008 00:50:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 30591 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jul 2008 00:50:04 -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 00:49:47 +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 m6E0njDW017178 for ; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:49:45 -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 m6E0njUW008597; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:49:45 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-10-12.bos.redhat.com [10.16.10.12]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m6E0niFB006344; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:49:44 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 077A0378171; Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:49:44 -0600 (MDT) To: Nick Roberts Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Patch: annotations -vs- deprecated hooks References: <18554.32994.171402.593716@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <18554.39826.254742.402462@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: Tom Tromey X-Attribution: Tom Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 00:50:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <18554.39826.254742.402462@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> (Nick Roberts's message of "Mon\, 14 Jul 2008 12\:19\:30 +1200") 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/msg00273.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Nick" == Nick Roberts writes: >> Is it just annotations that you care about, or all the deprecated hook >> stuff? I think it all falls into the category of not-broken. Nick> Emacs still uses annotations and it seems to work OK. Your Nick> earlier change, emoving event hooks, removes a significant Nick> amount of code and stops others from using them in the future. I think this change is worthwhile as a cleanup. It removes some more deprecated things, preventing use of them. When browsing gdb, I find it very strange to see how many things are marked deprecated, and for how long. E.g., deprecated_annotate_starting_hook is not set anywhere in gdb, but has been deprecated since 2004. That seems like an inordinately long deprecation for something which is unused. Nick> This patch, however, while probably safe (I've not checked) Nick> doesn't seem worthwhile to me since this code _will_ disappear Nick> in the future anyway. Do you know when this will be? If it is soon, then I don't mind holding off. If it will be a year, or years, then I think it would be strange to reject a cleanup in favor of some distant, unwritten patch. Tom