From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14124 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2009 20:54:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 14115 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Feb 2009 20:54:17 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:54:12 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1BKpif2006780; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:51:44 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n1BKpi2A020210; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:51:44 -0500 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-14-118.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.118]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1BKphw9029192; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:51:44 -0500 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id ED92F508250; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:51:41 -0700 (MST) To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, bauerman@br.ibm.com, drow@false.org, pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: add ability to "source" Python code References: <200902100000.22671.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200902100235.59897.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20090210034834.GA20077@caradoc.them.org> <1234267091.13871.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090211060911.GB4225@adacore.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: Tom Tromey Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:54:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed\, 11 Feb 2009 22\:21\:00 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (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: 2009-02/txt/msg00254.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: Eli> Considering that this is the only alternative proposed so far that has Eli> the most chances to be accepted, and that it is 100% backwards Eli> compatible, perhaps you could reconsider. Pedantically speaking, it is not compatible. Anybody can write that comment in their .gdbinit today. I don't really see a fundamental difference between compatibility of file contents and compatibility of file extensions -- I consider them both rather silly. But, in order to argue this way, I think you ought to explain why the disparity is ok. I stand by my view of the situation. That is why I withdrew the patch. I respect others' views on this and, in return, I expect mine to be respected. Tom