* refactoring frysk.proc.*Ptrace* into frysk.proc.ptrace ;; ditto for frysk.proc.core?
@ 2007-04-04 15:42 Andrew Cagney
2007-04-04 15:46 ` Phil Muldoon
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2007-04-04 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: frysk
Just a thought, with a second proc implementation, will this make life
easier?
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: refactoring frysk.proc.*Ptrace* into frysk.proc.ptrace ;; ditto for frysk.proc.core?
2007-04-04 15:42 refactoring frysk.proc.*Ptrace* into frysk.proc.ptrace ;; ditto for frysk.proc.core? Andrew Cagney
@ 2007-04-04 15:46 ` Phil Muldoon
2007-04-04 16:36 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Phil Muldoon @ 2007-04-04 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: frysk
Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Just a thought, with a second proc implementation, will this make life
> easier?
Not sure what you mean? You mean just rename the classes or create
separate namespaces below proc like:
frysk.proc.ptrace
with classes LinuxPtrace{Host|Proc|Task}{State}.java in there?
and same with:
frysk.proc.core
The seperate namespace thing makes sense to me, as proc is really
getting cluttered.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: refactoring frysk.proc.*Ptrace* into frysk.proc.ptrace ;; ditto for frysk.proc.core?
2007-04-04 15:46 ` Phil Muldoon
@ 2007-04-04 16:36 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2007-04-04 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Phil Muldoon; +Cc: frysk
Phil,
Yes, a separate name space frysk.proc.ptrace for ptrace and
frysk.proc.core for Core. Now that things are clearly cluttered I think
its time for a shuffle :-)
Andrew
Phil Muldoon wrote:
> Andrew Cagney wrote:
>> Just a thought, with a second proc implementation, will this make
>> life easier?
>
> Not sure what you mean? You mean just rename the classes or create
> separate namespaces below proc like:
>
> frysk.proc.ptrace
>
> with classes LinuxPtrace{Host|Proc|Task}{State}.java in there?
>
> and same with:
>
> frysk.proc.core
>
> The seperate namespace thing makes sense to me, as proc is really
> getting cluttered.
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-04-04 16:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-04-04 15:42 refactoring frysk.proc.*Ptrace* into frysk.proc.ptrace ;; ditto for frysk.proc.core? Andrew Cagney
2007-04-04 15:46 ` Phil Muldoon
2007-04-04 16:36 ` Andrew Cagney
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).