Re: [5/9] Associate parsed condition with location

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 09:46:13 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 03:17:06PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > We only need the function names, that's all.  A year from now, someone
> > who will want to find out when this change was done in one of those
> > functions, will grep the ChangeLog's for the function's name.
> 
> I don't think this is necessary, and it's definitely not customary.

It's never late to start making good log entries.

> Here's two of the examples from the GNU Coding Standards.  Re "Likewise":
> 
> * register.el (insert-register): Return nil.
> (jump-to-register): Likewise.
> 
> 
> And for large mechanical changes:
> 
> When you change the calling sequence of a function in a simple fashion,
> and you change all the callers of the function to use the new calling
> sequence, there is no need to make individual entries for all the
> callers that you changed.  Just write in the entry for the function
> being called, ``All callers changed''---like this:

Are we up to a quoting contest?  How about this one:

    It's important to name the changed function or variable in full.  Don't
    abbreviate function or variable names, and don't combine them.
    Subsequent maintainers will often search for a function name to find all
    the change log entries that pertain to it; if you abbreviate the name,
    they won't find it when they search.

Omitting function names is certainly not helpful when searching for
them in the logs.

Also, note the condition: ``when you change the calling sequence of a
function in a simple fashion''.  I don't think this is our case here.
The changes are not mechanical, either.

But I'm used to be voted down here lately; time for some
soul-searching (and this time of year is actually perfect for that, if
you know what I mean).