From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7061 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2009 20:53:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 7036 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Mar 2009 20:53:32 -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 mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:53:27 +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 n2HKr29s025660; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:53:02 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-14-28.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.28]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n2HKqxSE023589; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:52:59 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 88A323782FE; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:52:55 -0600 (MDT) To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] New gdb_usleep function? References: <20090317161240.GB31959@adacore.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:01:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20090317161240.GB31959@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Tue\, 17 Mar 2009 12\:12\:40 -0400") 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: 2009-03/txt/msg00334.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: Joel> I'm working on a patch for AIX where I need to do a timed-delay. Joel> I could do what I always do, which is call gdb_select, but I thought Joel> that this something we do occasionally, so I think it'd be nice to Joel> have a function that does everything for us. This is why I came up Joel> with gdb_usleep. Joel> Tested in amd64-linux. Any objection? This is not an objection, but I was wondering whether you looked at using the gnulib usleep replacement function. I think using gnulib functions, when applicable, is probably preferable to writing our own, because we can share some of the work with others. Tom