From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 107647 invoked by alias); 30 Jul 2017 18:29:29 -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 107620 invoked by uid 89); 30 Jul 2017 18:29:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=wish, policy X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2017 18:29:27 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v6UITKhs021109 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 30 Jul 2017 14:29:25 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id B56141EA01; Sun, 30 Jul 2017 14:29:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A62E1E043; Sun, 30 Jul 2017 14:29:10 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 18:29:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA v2 01/24] Introduce and use ui_out_emit_table In-Reply-To: <87efsxao7r.fsf@tromey.com> References: <20170725172107.9799-1-tom@tromey.com> <20170725172107.9799-2-tom@tromey.com> <87efsxao7r.fsf@tromey.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: simon.marchi@polymtl.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.0 X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Sun, 30 Jul 2017 18:29:20 +0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-07/txt/msg00442.txt.bz2 On 2017-07-30 18:23, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi writes: > >>> - ALL_BREAKPOINTS (b) >>> + ALL_BREAKPOINTS (b) > > Simon> Shouldn't the scope just under this be indented as well? > > I think gdb is inconsistent about this, and my rule has always been > that > whatever Emacs chooses is correct, since I think that's nearly GNU > policy. However, I will change it. You may wish to fix the other > instances. Hmm, ok. To me it would make sense to format it like for loops, since that's what it's replacing. How does emacs format ALL_BREAKPOINTS with a single statement under it? ALL_BREAKPOINTS (b) foo (b); or ALL_BREAKPOINTS (b) foo(b); ?