From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20283 invoked by alias); 31 Aug 2011 16:06:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 20273 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Aug 2011 16:06:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 16:06:37 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p7VG6boD019810 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:06:37 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p7VG6aCw016081; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:06:37 -0400 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 p7VG6Z5d004396; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:06:36 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] Code cleanup: Split value_of_this to &{,_silent} References: <20110831155801.GA16329@host1.jankratochvil.net> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 16:06:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20110831155801.GA16329@host1.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:58:01 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (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: 2011-08/txt/msg00665.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Jan> I find this as a code cleanup on its own but it is more clear with the Jan> [patch 2/2] where value_of_this would need to TRY_CATCH during complain==0 Jan> case and the code got very ugly afterwards. Looks good to me. I prefer this style as well, "complain"-like arguments make the API weird to use. Tom