Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
Cc: deuling@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [rfc] [2/6] Replace DEPRECATED_FUNCTION_START_OFFSET
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 05:43:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <utzt4qz28.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200706182038.l5IKcoQI005277@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> 	(uweigand@de.ibm.com)

> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:38:50 +0200 (CEST)
> From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
> Cc: deuling@de.ibm.com (Markus Deuling), gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> The purpose of this patch series is to make the "current_gdbarch" that is
> implicit in those macros *explicit* at the call site, so that we can
> subsequently replace it with the appropriate local "gdbarch" architecture.
> This is all part of supporting multiple architectures at the same time.
> 
> Now, for those particular cases where the macro is already deprecated,
> we might alternatively just eliminate its use.  However, for this specific
> macro some thought is required how that can be done (if at all).  I thought
> it made sense to follow through with eliminating all the gdbarch macros
> now, even the deprecated ones.  They actual elimination of the deprecated
> routines can happen later on just the same.

Sorry, but if this is the only reason, it doesn't make sense to me.  I
think if we touch deprecated code, we should not replace it with
another deprecated code.  If there's a way to eliminate deprecated
features, let's eliminate them, even if it takes more work.

That is my opinion; if others don't mind, I won't make a fuss out of
it, but I surely feel like we are doing haphazard job here.


  reply	other threads:[~2007-06-19  5:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-06-18  9:03 Markus Deuling
2007-06-18 19:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-06-18 20:39   ` Ulrich Weigand
2007-06-19  5:43     ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2007-06-19 18:57       ` Jim Blandy

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=utzt4qz28.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=deuling@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=uweigand@de.ibm.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