From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 56318 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2019 18:18:43 -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 56307 invoked by uid 89); 25 Apr 2019 18:18:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-11.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:314, HTo:U*palves 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 ESMTP; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 18:18:42 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933161166C5; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:18:41 -0400 (EDT) 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 7hotdWJRu+Sg; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:18:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from murgatroyd (97-122-168-123.hlrn.qwest.net [97.122.168.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C85B116520; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:18:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Fix memory leak in exception code References: <20190425165256.31226-1-tromey@adacore.com> <20190425165256.31226-6-tromey@adacore.com> <30e99361-c252-53e2-ec7c-5a6bc7301a3f@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 18:18:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <30e99361-c252-53e2-ec7c-5a6bc7301a3f@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Thu, 25 Apr 2019 19:06:10 +0100") Message-ID: <87ef5qaqyn.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2019-04/txt/msg00546.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Pedro> Why fix it like this, instead of fixing it like in the guile patch? Pedro> I'd think you could even use a common POD type for both guile and here? No particularly good reason. I'll change it. Tom