From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7142 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2011 13:58:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 7126 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Mar 2011 13:58:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO mel.act-europe.fr) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 13:58:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6AAACB026E; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:58:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id id5T954z-Ohs; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:58:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from ulanbator.act-europe.fr (ulanbator.act-europe.fr [10.10.1.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mel.act-europe.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDD8DCB01F8; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:58:13 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [RFA] make first parameter of to_lookup_symbol const char * Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Tristan Gingold In-Reply-To: <201103141353.10512.pedro@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:21:00 -0000 Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <216AE8CA-D201-42C6-82E5-D507F340FDBE@adacore.com> References: <58CFFAD9-1C02-4AD8-B416-FC48D1A7F006@adacore.com> <201103141353.10512.pedro@codesourcery.com> To: Pedro Alves , Joel Brobecker 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: 2011-03/txt/msg00727.txt.bz2 On Mar 14, 2011, at 2:53 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On Monday 14 March 2011 10:13:43, Tristan Gingold wrote: >=20 >> is there any good reason why the NAME parameter is 'char *' instead of '= const char *' ? I can't see any of them. >=20 > Old code. Original K&R didn't know about const. We have a lot of places > that could/should be const but aren't. It's an ongoing slow cleanup. >=20 >>=20 >> This patch was tested only by recompiling gdb for powerpc-elf. >>=20 >> BTW, it looks like no target defines this operation... >=20 > Are you going to add a use of it? Otherwise, I'd rather > just getting rid of it. No. Joel, can we remove that ? I thought we were using it for dfw, but we don'= t anymore. Tristan.