From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5393 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2010 15:48:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 5382 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Sep 2010 15:48:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:48:40 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o82Fm9vp004188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:48:09 -0400 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o82Fm7ZP000974 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:48:09 -0400 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o82Fm7i1010260; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 17:48:07 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o82Fm6VH010259; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 17:48:06 +0200 Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 17:04:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Daniel Jacobowitz , Eli Zaretskii , Mark Kettenis Subject: Re: [patch 1/9]#2 Rename `enum target_signal' to target_signal_t Message-ID: <20100902154806.GA9982@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20100901200621.GA11085@caradoc.them.org> <201009012108.56984.pedro@codesourcery.com> <201009020254.47745.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20100902153923.GN2986@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100902153923.GN2986@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2010-09/txt/msg00099.txt.bz2 On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 17:39:23 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > struct target_signal_o > > { > > int number; > > const char *name; > > const char *string; > > }; [...] > And I don't think that this is incompatible with Jan's initial goal > of having a structure with signal and siginfo data. It is currently incompatible as to keep it <= / >= etc. comparable it must be kept as a pointer-to-struct, not as a struct-as-value. This approach expects there is a finite set of predefined target_signal possibilities. But then arbitrary set of dynamic content requires some allocate/free and/or ref/unref. Marking all reffing/unreffing in the code is according to my experience unmanageable. > but if we ever change our mind again, one day in the future GDB may already have C++ and everything will be easy. Thanks, Jan