From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 59114 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2015 13:40:01 -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 59103 invoked by uid 89); 15 Dec 2015 13:40:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:39:59 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89311116789; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 08:39:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id gljQSbHjiQW9; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 08:39:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CDC7116748; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 08:39:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 08FE6405C0; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:39:48 +0400 (RET) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:40:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Keith Seitz Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/9] Explicit locations: introduce address locations Message-ID: <20151215133948.GA7938@adacore.com> References: <20150805232802.21646.88440.stgit@valrhona.uglyboxes.com> <20150805232951.21646.67733.stgit@valrhona.uglyboxes.com> <20151214071113.GA6230@adacore.com> <566F2CF1.1030003@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <566F2CF1.1030003@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2015-12/txt/msg00289.txt.bz2 > I guess when it boils down to it, I don't really have a super strong > preference for either case, but I do have a preference for maintaining > addresses as a separate location type. What can I say? I hate special > cases! :-P > > > WDYT? I admit I'm a little lost still between the various layers > > of locations, event_locations, etc. Do you want to take it from there? > > I am more than happy to fix anything related to this code in any > appropriate manner dictated by maintainers. [Of course, if this involves > a massive rewrite, I will have to clear with my management!] > > Let me know how you and other maintainers would like me to proceed. Thanks for your insights, Keith. I agree the choice is not clearly black or white; but because you probably know this area better than anyone, I'm inclined to follow your suggestion. Given that the patch I sent is close to what you would have written, I think it makes sense for me to see this through, and have you help with the review? Any comments on the current one before I proceed with a more official submission? Thanks! -- Joel