From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/8] Language independent bits
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:27:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3sjjfo21o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3y5t7cub8.fsf@redhat.com> (Sergio Durigan Junior's message of "Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:37:47 -0200")
>>>>> "Sergio" == Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com> writes:
Sergio> I already replaced `int' by `size_t'. Do you want me to revert
Sergio> the change?
No, there's no need to do additional work.
My general rule is that we should review patches, not the context of
patches. If the context of a patch has problems, and it matters to the
reviewer, then either (1) the review can ask for a separate patch to fix
it (and in this case accept "no" as an answer), or (2) the reviewer can
fix it himself (since it is so darn important :-).
Sometimes it can be hard to recognize that a particular gross bit in a
patch was actually just moved from elsewhere. In this case, IMO, the
patch submitter can and probably should just push back against the
review -- whatever bad effect there was is already there.
Of course, it is nice if we improve the code as we go along. I think it
is usually easier to understand, and thus also review and approve,
separate patches for separate issues.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-16 19:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-15 18:51 [RFC 0/8] Beginning to remove globals from parser-defs.h Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-15 18:56 ` [RFC 1/8] Language independent bits Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-15 21:08 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-01-15 21:17 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-15 22:03 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-01-16 12:32 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-16 20:40 ` Tom Tromey
2012-01-16 19:39 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-16 19:40 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-01-16 20:27 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2012-01-17 16:44 ` Doug Evans
2012-01-17 16:54 ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-01-15 19:01 ` [RFC 2/8] C language Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-16 19:29 ` Tom Tromey
2012-01-16 19:55 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-18 11:38 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-18 16:50 ` Tom Tromey
2012-01-15 19:04 ` [RFC 3/8] Ada language Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-15 19:05 ` [RFC 4/8] Fortran language Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-15 19:06 ` [RFC 5/8] Java language Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-15 19:07 ` [RFC 6/8] Modula-2 language Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-17 10:21 ` Gaius Mulley
2012-01-15 19:10 ` [RFC 7/8] Objective-C language Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-15 20:34 ` [RFC 8/8] Pascal language Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-01-16 19:29 ` Tom Tromey
2012-01-16 19:29 ` [RFC 0/8] Beginning to remove globals from parser-defs.h Tom Tromey
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3sjjfo21o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=sergiodj@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox