From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-31467-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 5714 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2008 13:03:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 5564 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Mar 2008 13:03:04 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from imr2.ericy.com (HELO imr2.ericy.com) (198.24.6.3)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:02:37 +0000
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) 	by imr2.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m2QD2R3Q000712; 	Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:02:32 -0500
Received: from ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se ([142.133.1.72]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); 	 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:02:29 -0500
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: Binary numbers starting with 0b
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:24:00 -0000
Message-ID: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA04290FCA@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <20080325203030.GA27776@caradoc.them.org>
From: "Marc Khouzam" <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com>
To: "Daniel Jacobowitz" <drow@false.org>
Cc: <gdb@sources.redhat.com>, <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00237.txt.bz2

> From: Daniel Jacobowitz
> > Or maybe there was a backwards compatibility concern?  I actually am a =
bit worried
> > about adding the 0b as not being backwards compatible, although I do th=
ink it would
> > be a nice thing for GDB to accept.
>=20
> No, there was no decision against it.  I still think it's a good idea,
> I just didn't have time to update the parsers.
>=20
> I do not see any compatibility problems.

I'm not sure what is considered bacwards-compatible but I figured
that if this patch broke the test suite, then there was some compatibility =
issue :-)
One example is if a frontend prepends binary numbers with 0b to display to =
the user;
they may now end up with 0b0b1010 if they didn't first check for the presen=
ce of 0b.
But maybe this is being overly careful.=20=20

I still vote for the 0b, though.

Thanks

Marc