Re: [PATCH 0/7] Implement gdbarch_gdb_signal_{to,from}_target

[Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com>]

On Saturday, July 27 2013, Doug Evans wrote:

> Hi.

Hi.  Sorry for the delay.

> I reviewed all the patches.
> Except for a few nits pointed out in some of the patches, the set is
> ok with me.

Thanks.

> As a sanity check, did you do an enable-targets=all build?

Yes, I always build my patches this way :-).

> I gather there is a use for gdbarch_gdb_signal_to_target coming, so no
> worries there.

Yep.

> In older times one couldn't use "signal" as a variable name to avoid a
> possible collision with a system header defining a macro signal.  I
> see record-full.c uses "signal" so perhaps we no longer have to deal
> with that, but heads up.

Hm, I wasn't aware of such constraint.  Anyway, since there is a
precedence, then I won't bother changing.

> [fwiw, and this is just a side discussion, not meant to block the
> patch or anything ...
> This is an example of the kind of thing that I wish existed in a
> library anyone could use.
> Yeah, we're converting to/from GDB_FOO, but I can imagine it being
> useful to multiple tools.]

Sounds nice, indeed.  Weekend project, maybe?  :-).

-- 
Sergio