From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22403 invoked by alias); 3 May 2005 22:31:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22177 invoked from network); 3 May 2005 22:31:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO priv-edtnes56.telusplanet.net) (199.185.220.220) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 3 May 2005 22:31:16 -0000 Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr ([154.20.104.226]) by priv-edtnes56.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.04 201-2131-118-104-20050224) with ESMTP id <20050503223111.PJHS13846.priv-edtnes56.telusplanet.net@takamaka.act-europe.fr>; Tue, 3 May 2005 16:31:11 -0600 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 13E5347DC4; Tue, 3 May 2005 15:31:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 22:31:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Mark Kettenis , gdb@sourceware.org, cagney@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org Subject: Re: A case for `void *' for pointers to arbitrary (byte) buffers Message-ID: <20050503223111.GC2201@adacore.com> References: <01c54e92$Blat.v2.4$5cf24460@zahav.net.il> <42755FD4.8000009@gnu.org> <01c54f4a$Blat.v2.4$a9fc8500@zahav.net.il> <42778DE6.1080106@gnu.org> <200505032013.j43KD1dD005239@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20050503202352.GA6424@nevyn.them.org> <200505032113.j43LDOlL013376@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20050503211646.GB8203@nevyn.them.org> <200505032206.j43M6QEN002791@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20050503222744.GA10500@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050503222744.GA10500@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00048.txt.bz2 > To be honest, my preference is still for gdb_byte * over uint8_t *, for > exactly the reason Stan just mentioned: consistency. Whether that's > defined as unsigned char or uint8_t is less important to me. This is my preference too. -- Joel