From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30222 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2010 12:50:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 30206 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Nov 2010 12:50:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 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; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 12:50:47 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oA8Co0jK003614 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 8 Nov 2010 07:50:00 -0500 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oA8Cntvf017347 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Nov 2010 07:49:59 -0500 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oA8CnoGC029705; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 13:49:51 +0100 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id oA8CngpA029704; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 13:49:42 +0100 Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 12:50:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com, ken@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tromey@redhat.com, pedro@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: [doc RFA] Switch to GCC coding style [Re: [patch] initial OpenCL C language support] Message-ID: <20101108124942.GA29408@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <201010221920.30046.ken@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20101026195747.GE2847@adacore.com> <20101027190417.GA19067@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201010272020.51386.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20101102165134.GA19296@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20101102172246.GA22137@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <8339rj5y7z.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8339rj5y7z.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2010-11/txt/msg00113.txt.bz2 On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 20:20:32 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Are you submitting this for doc review, or will we discuss the issue > first? I thought about it as a quick fix as currently the code follows different rules ("!" - GCC) than what states gdbint.texinfo ("! " - GNU). At least Pedro says "We tend to follow these already". > I don't think this is enough, sorry. The GCC Conventions mention a > lot of details that are utterly inapplicable to GDB. The exceptions > you mention are just a drop in that sea. What about references to > ERROR_MARK, RTL, --param arguments, what about fastjar and boehm-gc? > And those are just a few random examples. > > On balance, I think we should simply have our own coherent document. Yes, it would be better. But I am not going to spend the time on it myself. > Any other way, we will just confuse potential contributors: They are already confused now (at least I have been confused by "!" vs. "! " so far myself) and IMO the proposed patch reduces the confusion. > To say nothing of the fact that they will now have to read two documents > instead of 1. 3 instead of 2 (besides GNU Coding Standards and gdbint.texinfo Coding Standards proposing also GCC Coding Conventions). Regards, Jan