From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11EB83858C54 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:07:48 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 11EB83858C54 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1682690867; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KNHkO1skPZxfGMnSZh0euOhAfpPADnq2R6d2gvm3Kmg=; b=XqoYoZj4RCCMUcA5MmLXbgr4+9peMjLZNAE8qj4RCNxIz4B2awaONWchpVUZMa9RVo4nar sqCKESPpKZDFIb7nduPYxwFNmuCj1O9sfcmPNjDukJ4D9He3be5k1G4aSSkdpsr6HaJT3Q lcdzOa0Kx16nGilTfFjI5W7YpqRdG3g= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-241-YVtOB7R5OsCdaMvpu86GYg-1; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:07:46 -0400 X-MC-Unique: YVtOB7R5OsCdaMvpu86GYg-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-3f1763fac8bso63957195e9.1 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 07:07:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682690865; x=1685282865; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=KNHkO1skPZxfGMnSZh0euOhAfpPADnq2R6d2gvm3Kmg=; b=hYwLMcdaj1P/Lhf3Ef68TYBcqq3xnJiXrxGJy76R5iBaI9tZriinEVoaM71mqWkFlY 5tDKV63AW7/xzZg2DIeZ7dBNK8QO6yOHXbxXUhKYH6tPs5u7d5rNRQF846tqYFSdTSy1 TY+iojWbllwfk8Ks58NoqqQK4GcauaTg0Mc44l+DbH6tZvcxrOO65JF09UiyUGD3tctx EY6nMChnAKNsL0tJnbfF98vK5e0bX2HjZhxkFYS0fqH+Njkl1NBF/VGhrghdfYal/Jbb jNTG9Ab1A7vbhzGMkRLjO/ZSey53mMFxgc1YNro29q9lS+rbTQSr3JN6zXP4AoVFPeXZ pBfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzQYIq7jlxCK/8mNy1TN+KrRwgnmGH64e4VbA4ugivdyPT5GRqq LfJJmg4k/rDnhWTi2nEqm/FnnxAEBGfHG7Bbb6ejk7FDXDnLhnbjpeCgcOuSZ6Vftv7bq95Wkse mLVtcne9kc5r/gBiBkwFS2C7zLN7IYA== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c856:0:b0:3f3:1fa6:d2c8 with SMTP id c22-20020a7bc856000000b003f31fa6d2c8mr2995889wml.26.1682690865339; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 07:07:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6PN8fAJO0fXOkuqPGr06bmlMOLT8WO6JecE9phjGT93mbtyWZFxyerCO+dbKMzBKI1P678Hg== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c856:0:b0:3f3:1fa6:d2c8 with SMTP id c22-20020a7bc856000000b003f31fa6d2c8mr2995863wml.26.1682690865070; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 07:07:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (11.72.115.87.dyn.plus.net. [87.115.72.11]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y26-20020a1c4b1a000000b003f318be9442sm4975744wma.40.2023.04.28.07.07.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 28 Apr 2023 07:07:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrew Burgess To: Tom Tromey , Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Cc: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/doc: don't use @var on @defun lines In-Reply-To: <87y1mdw9y0.fsf@tromey.com> References: <27f86d992bf0dbd795bbffd169c9da17c1da56b0.1680791507.git.aburgess@redhat.com> <87cz3pbhn9.fsf@redhat.com> <83mt2tsbcv.fsf@gnu.org> <87y1mdw9y0.fsf@tromey.com> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 15:07:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87354kaymo.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Tom Tromey writes: >>> Given your feedback on other patches that @var on a @defun line is not >>> desirable I assume I could probably push this as obvious? > > Eli> Yes, thanks. > > I also sent a patch like this, but my version fixed another issue: > > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2023-April/198659.html > > ... namely that one variable name seemed strange, as it is invalid in > Python. > > I can rebase that once Andrew's goes in. Tom, If you patch is a super-set of mine, then you should just go ahead and push yours. Thanks, Andrew