From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3563 invoked by alias); 3 Feb 2003 16:34:58 -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 3556 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2003 16:34:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 3 Feb 2003 16:34:57 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15E5A3CB4; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 11:34:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E3E9A2A.7040300@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 16:34:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021211 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Kellogg, Oliver" Cc: Joel Brobecker , "'aidan@velvet.net'" , Paul Hilfinger , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Status of Ada support in GDB References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00053.txt.bz2 > Many thanks for your replies. > > Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> >> There is still a bit missing. Aidan Skinner has been chipping away at >> the problem of getting GNAT's code up to current standards. > > > I find this surprising and beg detail. I don't. The code, for 5 years has been sitting, unrevewed, on a branch. > What is the issue about GNAT's code? The same issues as with any submition: - It needs to be brought up to current coding standards. The original code was written something nothing like the GNU standard. - any invasive change needs to be individually presented for peer review Having the code sit on a branch for 5 years doesn't in some way excuse the need to do this. Andrew