From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Kettenis To: muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Pascal language support patch preparation Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000 Message-id: <200003021502.e22F2fk07660@delius.kettenis.local> References: <200003021347.OAA01051@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr> <200003021257.NAA00259@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr> <200003021432.PAA01976@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr> X-SW-Source: 2000-q1/msg00507.html Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 15:16:19 +0100 From: Pierre Muller >Patches to create those new p-* files cannot be broken up of course, >but your patch also touches a lot of the other GDB files. Breaking >those patches up in smaller though functionally related chunks makes >reviewing and applying the patches a lot easier. > >I'd advise you to do the following: > >1. If you need some tweaks in GDB that do not depend on the Pascal > support itself, start submitting these ASAP. I don't think I really have such code ! Are you sure? The patch I downloaded last fall includes changes to breakpoint.c, findvar.c, i387-tdep.c, infcmd.c and source.c that seem to be pretty independent of Pascal at first glance. >2. Then send the new p-* as one single patch. Alone ? tihs would just leave them unused first ! That's not a problem. The point is that these changes cannot break anything, so they don't need a lot of attention. >3. Then send a patch that adds the code to hook in the GDB support. OK, here a would have the biggest part of the problems probably because some of the change are not trivial but I agree that I can probably splitt those. That would indeed be best, since that lets the maintainer of that particular part of GDB deal with problems one at a time, which in general gets the changes integrated much quicker. For instance a big problem on which I spent a lot of time is to get GDB to accept the fact the pascal is case insensitive this required changes in gnu-regex code !! I'm sorry to hear that you spent a lot of time on it. Modifying the regex code is something that we should only do as a last resort since it is shared with a lot of other GNU packages. Maybe GDB should use the POSIX functions instead of the BSD functions such that REG_ICASE can be used when the default language is Pascal. On the bright side: Case insensitivity would be convenient, but should not be essential for basic Pascal support in GDB. We should be able to address this as a seperate issue. I'll see what I can do. For now it is probably better to leave out this bit when you send your new patches. > indent --version gives "GNU indent 2.2.5" > is that not the current version ?? > >Yes it is, but it isn't the version that was used for reformatting the >GDB sources. See: > > http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/1999-q3/msg00014.html This not really very informative on the method that was used to do it ! Pardon me? It clearly states that: ``[Stan] used indent 1.9.1 (with no arguments)''. Mark >From taylor@cygnus.com Sat Apr 01 00:00:00 2000 From: David Taylor To: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Cc: Pierre Muller Subject: patch mailing list (was: Re: 2 pascal language patches inserted in database) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000 Message-id: <200003031637.LAA19025@texas.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-q1/msg00526.html Content-length: 833 Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 15:44:13 +0100 From: Pierre Muller Subject: I submitted two patches for pascal extension in the database! I am subscribed to gdb-patches and I think that this should be enough to gt also all mails generated by the gdb patch database, but I saw a subcribe link! Why is this distinct ? I agree wholeheartedly. I am also surprised that when the database went live that all maintainers weren't automatically subscribed to the relevant mailing list. If you had not sent this message I wouldn't have known that the pascal patches were there. I will try to look at this today, but I doubt I'll have time. I'm on vacation all next week (and not net accessible). There also doesn't appear to be a link to the patch database from the gdb page.