From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32028 invoked by alias); 19 Jun 2007 05:43:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 32020 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Jun 2007 05:43:51 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from heller.inter.net.il (HELO heller.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 05:43:48 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-229-217-214.inter.net.il [84.229.217.214]) by heller.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id CWD09151 (AUTH halo1); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 08:43:27 +0300 (IDT) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 05:43:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: "Ulrich Weigand" CC: deuling@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <200706182038.l5IKcoQI005277@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> (uweigand@de.ibm.com) Subject: Re: [rfc] [2/6] Replace DEPRECATED_FUNCTION_START_OFFSET Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200706182038.l5IKcoQI005277@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2007-06/txt/msg00366.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:38:50 +0200 (CEST) > From: "Ulrich Weigand" > 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.