From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8664 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2009 22:41:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 8656 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jun 2009 22:41:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:41:49 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66582BAB0D; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:41:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Eulrdkft63M5; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:41:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E9292BAB09; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:41:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 38260F5A7D; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:41:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:41:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: Michael Snyder , Paul Pluzhnikov , Andr? P?nitz , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Learn function name by its address Message-ID: <20090626224142.GQ6469@adacore.com> References: <8763ekb9ql.fsf@sphinx.net.ru> <8ac60eac0906250853y3f70e3b1y2bf97674b1e83d7b@mail.gmail.com> <200906260838.31341.andre.poenitz@nokia.com> <8ac60eac0906260004t4b78c1ffv47eedd2ecb4662f4@mail.gmail.com> <8ac60eac0906261035g7ad07e7fx6af9af503775b6f8@mail.gmail.com> <4A451826.3010709@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00261.txt.bz2 > I tend to think that if nobody has implemented these in $X years, then > nobody ever will. But then, I'm generally also in the "never comment > out code, just delete it" camp. So am I. The code is still around, just in CVS instead of inside a comment. Leaving it commented out just creates more clutter that tends to stay rather than being fixed. So I really favor deleting. -- Joel