From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 43947 invoked by alias); 23 May 2018 13:35:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 43934 invoked by uid 89); 23 May 2018 13:35:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=UD:complaints.exp, complaints.exp, complaintsexp, unusually X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 May 2018 13:35:45 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7F1FC12C4; Wed, 23 May 2018 13:35:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C41063536; Wed, 23 May 2018 13:35:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFA 0/9] Radically simplify the complaint system To: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20180522050704.10845-1-tom@tromey.com> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <190d88e2-35a5-9dc2-8b28-4a8c37e0617a@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:49:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180522050704.10845-1-tom@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-05/txt/msg00625.txt.bz2 On 05/22/2018 06:06 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I must confess, I've long disliked the complaint system. It got in > the way a little bit, ages ago, when I tried to multi-thread the > psymtab reader. And, it got in the way a bit more during one of my > attempts to format the "Reading symbols" output more nicely (spoiler: > I have another approach to this in the works, but I took this detour > first). Aside from these things, the code also seemed unusually > complex for the task it performed. > > This series radically simplifies the complaint system. It removes > most of the code -- which, I think, has never really been used. Awesome! I started doing something similar a while ago after adding the complaint wrapper macro, but never really finished it off: https://github.com/palves/gdb/tree/palves/complaints Probably nothing worth looking over. This looks good to me, but I have one question: Can you give an example case of when do we still need or want the ISOLATED_MESSAGE vs SHORT_FIRST_MESSAGE distinction? I removed it from my version, but I don't recall whether I concluded the distinction made no difference, or whether I still wanted to double check. Off hand, since we're admitting that complaints are only for debug info reading, I'd think the distinction doesn't make much sense. Unless we're really not admitting that? /me confused, I guess. > Tested by the buildbot. I also locally tested complaints.exp with > each patch in the series. Note: git am showed: Applying: Remove symfile_complaints .git/rebase-apply/patch:247: trailing whitespace. vcomplaint (const char *file, .git/rebase-apply/patch:253: trailing whitespace. struct complain *complaint = find_complaint (&symfile_complaint_book, file, .git/rebase-apply/patch:2497: trailing whitespace. complaint (_("Bad method name '%s'"), warning: 3 lines add whitespace errors. Thanks, Pedro Alves