From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-59761-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 17276 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2008 09:28:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 17243 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Nov 2008 09:28:53 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout4.012.net.il (HELO mtaout4.012.net.il) (84.95.2.10)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 Nov 2008 09:28:11 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.i_mtaout4.012.net.il by i_mtaout4.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) id <0KA000N00CVZ4J00@i_mtaout4.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sat, 08 Nov 2008 11:29:42 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.241.172]) by i_mtaout4.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0KA000AHAD1I76B0@i_mtaout4.012.net.il>; Sat, 08 Nov 2008 11:29:42 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2008 09:28:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Process record and replay, 4/10
In-reply-to: <daef60380811072228i4c180776qffbf933fba381c17@mail.gmail.com>
X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il
To: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <u7i7esh2a.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <daef60380811052347y4077eb2ehfb890faf45c6e87b@mail.gmail.com> <uod0rshae.fsf@gnu.org> <daef60380811072228i4c180776qffbf933fba381c17@mail.gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg00152.txt.bz2

> Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 14:28:56 +0800
> From: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 23:10, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >> Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 15:47:45 +0800
> >> From: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> +      /* Set the real beneath function pointers. */
> >
> > Could you please rephrase this comment?  I don't understand what it
> > tries to say.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> 
> What about change it to "Update the function pointers that process record use."

Maybe, but you use the word "beneath" in many more places, and also in
symbol names, so that word should probably not be removed from the
comment.

Could you explain what is meant by "beneath function pointers" in this
case?  I could then suggest a better wording for this particular
comment.