From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7802 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2007 19:38:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 7794 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jun 2007 19:38:12 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 19:38:10 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403E12A9BFC; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 15:38:08 -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 5zNvsKEp1rfC; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 15:38:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (nile.gnat.com [205.232.38.5]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 014052A9BFB; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 15:38:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4680199F.7020906@adacore.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 19:38:00 -0000 From: Robert Dewar User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Koning , jimb@codesourcery.com, eager@eagercon.com, stanshebs@earthlink.net, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: What's an annex? stratum? References: <467D5FEF.7010900@eagercon.com> <467D6D1F.7090507@earthlink.net> <467D6FB8.4080909@eagercon.com> <468009EA.4040504@eagercon.com> <18048.5444.903092.843811@pkoning.equallogic.com> <20070625193135.GA6391@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20070625193135.GA6391@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2007-06/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 03:19:32PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > That's really unfortunate. Comments in code are useful but they are > no substitute for properly written internals documentation. I disagree, properly arranged comments in the code can most certainly serve as internals documentation, and have a FAR better chance of being kept up to date. I am opposed to having separate internals documentation, I think it is much better to have this in the source files. Just so you know you cannot assume consensus on Paul's view here :-)