Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il>
Cc: cagney@gnu.org, drow@false.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com,
	mec.gnu@mindspring.com
Subject: Re: Branch created for inter-compilation-unit references
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:06:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <D898B023-6821-11D8-B051-000A95DA505C@dberlin.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <uvflubdhm.fsf@elta.co.il>


On Feb 26, 2004, at 12:45 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
>> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:53:54 -0500
>>
>> You == very bad troll.
>
> Kindly stop this kind of ``reasoning'' here.
> It hurts the discussions
> by making them a childish exchange of ``did not'', ``did, too'' type
> of arguments.

Andrew continually claimed provably untrue things that could do nothing 
but piss off people involved in the hard work that went on in the gcc 
tree-ssa branch (schedule slippage, too many resources consumed, etc)
It did, in fact, do just that, and i'm not referring to me, even though 
i did work on that branch. There was absolutely no reason for doing 
this other than to piss off people, since they were, as i said, 
provably untrue.
This is generally known as trolling.
This is why i replied.
Because others are too kind to call Andrew on some of the bullshit he 
spews.
I am not so kind.
If GDB actually had a real steering committee, i would seriously 
recommend that they reprimand him publicly for those comments (which 
GCC's steering committee has done for certain people in the past).
It's crap like that that strains relationships between GCC and GDB.
For a head maintainer, he should be being more careful about what he 
says.
> This issue is too serious for us to allow ourselves to
> do that.
>
I'm seriously concerned that if he thinks the tree-ssa branch is 
somehow an example of a bad development plan, that gdb development is 
going down the wrong path.
I'm also seriously concerned that if he somehow thinks DW_OP_piece 
support is more important than the intercu-branch, that he is also 
going down the wrong path.  GCC has emitted DW_OP_piece for a while. 
GCC has been able to emit inter-cu references for a while. Every user 
i've talked with is much more concerned with being able to reduce the 
size of their debugging info, which requires intercu support, than they 
are with debugging some variable that uses DW_OP_piece.
They've learned to work around DW_OP_piece issues through various 
hacks, but large debugging info and high memory usage prevents some of 
them from debugging at *all*.

But again, i'll just unsubscribe from gdb.
I came back after i was asked by various people to do so.
I won't make such a mistake again.

--Dan


  reply	other threads:[~2004-02-26  6:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-25  3:51 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-02-25  5:12 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-25 16:10   ` Daniel Berlin
2004-02-25 17:01     ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-25 17:07       ` Daniel Berlin
2004-02-25 18:50         ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-25 18:53           ` Daniel Berlin
2004-02-25 19:48             ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-26  5:48             ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-02-26  6:06               ` Daniel Berlin [this message]
2004-02-26  6:31                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-02-26 15:05                   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-26 16:19                     ` Elena Zannoni
2004-02-26 16:25                       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-26 16:36                         ` Elena Zannoni
2004-02-26 16:54                           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-26 19:01                           ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-02-26 19:10                     ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-02-26 19:24                     ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-26 19:28                       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-26 20:19                         ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-26  5:48         ` Eli Zaretskii
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-02-21 20:08 Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-25  0:18 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-25  0:35   ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-25  1:29     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-25  2:23       ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-25  2:27         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-25  3:17           ` Andrew Cagney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=D898B023-6821-11D8-B051-000A95DA505C@dberlin.org \
    --to=dberlin@dberlin.org \
    --cc=cagney@gnu.org \
    --cc=drow@false.org \
    --cc=eliz@elta.co.il \
    --cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=mec.gnu@mindspring.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox