* _initialize_inftarg
@ 2002-06-25 13:01 Tom Tromey
2002-06-25 20:19 ` _initialize_inftarg Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tom Tromey @ 2002-06-25 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gdb List
There are 3 functions in gdb named _initialize_inftarg:
grep -n '^_initialize_inftarg' *.c /dev/null
inftarg.c:839:_initialize_inftarg (void)
win32-nat.c:1818:_initialize_inftarg (void)
wince.c:1968:_initialize_inftarg (void)
I assume the win* ones are simply cut-and-paste error?
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: _initialize_inftarg
2002-06-25 13:01 _initialize_inftarg Tom Tromey
@ 2002-06-25 20:19 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-06-25 20:27 ` _initialize_inftarg Christopher Faylor
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-06-25 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tromey; +Cc: Gdb List
> There are 3 functions in gdb named _initialize_inftarg:
>
> grep -n '^_initialize_inftarg' *.c /dev/null
> inftarg.c:839:_initialize_inftarg (void)
> win32-nat.c:1818:_initialize_inftarg (void)
> wince.c:1968:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>
> I assume the win* ones are simply cut-and-paste error?
Er, yes - they should correspond to their file names. I guess only one
was linked in at any time.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: _initialize_inftarg
2002-06-25 20:19 ` _initialize_inftarg Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-06-25 20:27 ` Christopher Faylor
2002-06-26 19:26 ` _initialize_inftarg Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Christopher Faylor @ 2002-06-25 20:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gdb List
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 11:19:23PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>>There are 3 functions in gdb named _initialize_inftarg:
>>
>> grep -n '^_initialize_inftarg' *.c /dev/null
>> inftarg.c:839:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>> win32-nat.c:1818:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>> wince.c:1968:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>>
>>I assume the win* ones are simply cut-and-paste error?
>
>Er, yes - they should correspond to their file names. I guess only one
>was linked in at any time.
That routine is pretty ancient. It was apparently introduced by Steve
Chamberlain in 1995.
Does it really hurt for it to be called by that name, though?
_inftarg.c will never be linked for a windows gdb. I think it was meant
to somewhat emulate the functionality of the similar function in
inftarg.c.
cgf
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: _initialize_inftarg
2002-06-25 20:27 ` _initialize_inftarg Christopher Faylor
@ 2002-06-26 19:26 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-06-27 13:48 ` _initialize_inftarg Christopher Faylor
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-06-26 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christopher Faylor; +Cc: Gdb List
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 11:19:23PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>>>There are 3 functions in gdb named _initialize_inftarg:
>>>
>>> grep -n '^_initialize_inftarg' *.c /dev/null
>>> inftarg.c:839:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>>> win32-nat.c:1818:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>>> wince.c:1968:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>>>
>>>I assume the win* ones are simply cut-and-paste error?
>
>>
>>Er, yes - they should correspond to their file names. I guess only one
>>was linked in at any time.
>
>
> That routine is pretty ancient. It was apparently introduced by Steve
> Chamberlain in 1995.
>
> Does it really hurt for it to be called by that name, though?
> _inftarg.c will never be linked for a windows gdb. I think it was meant
> to somewhat emulate the functionality of the similar function in
> inftarg.c.
True, for the sake of consistency though, I think a file called FILE.c
should have _initialize_file() as the initialise function.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: _initialize_inftarg
2002-06-26 19:26 ` _initialize_inftarg Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-06-27 13:48 ` Christopher Faylor
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Christopher Faylor @ 2002-06-27 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gdb List
On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 10:26:34PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>>On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 11:19:23PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>>
>>>>There are 3 functions in gdb named _initialize_inftarg:
>>>>
>>>> grep -n '^_initialize_inftarg' *.c /dev/null
>>>> inftarg.c:839:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>>>> win32-nat.c:1818:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>>>> wince.c:1968:_initialize_inftarg (void)
>>>>
>>>>I assume the win* ones are simply cut-and-paste error?
>>
>>>
>>>Er, yes - they should correspond to their file names. I guess only one
>>>was linked in at any time.
>>
>>
>>That routine is pretty ancient. It was apparently introduced by Steve
>>Chamberlain in 1995.
>>
>>Does it really hurt for it to be called by that name, though?
>>_inftarg.c will never be linked for a windows gdb. I think it was meant
>>to somewhat emulate the functionality of the similar function in
>>inftarg.c.
>
>True, for the sake of consistency though, I think a file called FILE.c
>should have _initialize_file() as the initialise function.
Ok. I'll put this on my todo list.
cgf
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-06-27 20:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-06-25 13:01 _initialize_inftarg Tom Tromey
2002-06-25 20:19 ` _initialize_inftarg Andrew Cagney
2002-06-25 20:27 ` _initialize_inftarg Christopher Faylor
2002-06-26 19:26 ` _initialize_inftarg Andrew Cagney
2002-06-27 13:48 ` _initialize_inftarg Christopher Faylor
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox