From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A2BD3851ABF for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2023 15:45:34 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 1A2BD3851ABF Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca Received: from [172.16.0.192] (192-222-143-198.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.143.198]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADDC11E110; Mon, 20 Mar 2023 11:45:33 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1679327133; bh=ufV+feentr21PFuvmVOpx2AnYK+GB1eVcFEFWUIaS9k=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=EiVOniUg1RlthX45lIf4k5wcwHq+lXtc8CaTh0BVbbHOx1Lz9ahqFiD9RWdOY1plQ 8HmbRrgqXXFZfKSA4ejgCVbJA1zTYIpEnAEkPyJDIv/9Tz5nnQOu+7u50cJYSwYXFD JaTRiTnQMAAh9QZq3WPruomKvQqS7/N6kOSQ7r64= Message-ID: Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 11:45:33 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove some unnecessary includes from *-exp.y Content-Language: fr To: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20230318144450.1928512-1-tom@tromey.com> From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: <20230318144450.1928512-1-tom@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP 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: On 3/18/23 10:44, Tom Tromey wrote: > I noticed a weird comment in one of the .y files, and then ended up > removing some unnecessary #includes from these files. If it builds, it seems fine to me. Those comments (that tell why an include is used) almost seem useless to me, as it's nearly impossible to maintain them. It's hard to know if something in these files does need one of the headers you remove, and if you now make them rely on indirect inclusions. But again, if it builds, there's no harm done. They can always be re-added if a problem relocated to indirect inclusion shows up later. Approved-By: Simon Marchi Simon