From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5198 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 2010 22:35:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 5158 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Sep 2010 22:35:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 22:34:57 +0000 Received: from int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o81MYSKP027743 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 1 Sep 2010 18:34:29 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o81MYSdr031941; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 18:34:28 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o81MYRQF007269; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 18:34:27 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id B0F09379677; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 16:34:26 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Joel Brobecker , Eli Zaretskii , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 1/9]#2 Rename `enum target_signal' to target_signal_t References: <20100830140814.GE2986@adacore.com> <20100831182829.GA16136@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100901181830.GB2986@adacore.com> <20100901182943.GA23673@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100901183952.GE2986@adacore.com> <20100901185112.GC24300@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 22:37:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20100901185112.GC24300@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:51:12 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2010-09/txt/msg00069.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: I read through this thread today. Jan> Keeping the `enum target_signal' name would contradict (**) the Jan> sole remaining meaning of the [patch 3/9]#2 patch (*) - making Jan> target_signal and `int host_signal' type incompatible catching Jan> various bugs in the current code. I think this is still worth doing. This sort of compile-time check catches real bugs cheaply. I think your approach is the most reasonable overall of the ones that have been proposed. If I read the thread correctly, nobody actually objected to the use of a struct that is passed by value. So, I propose moving forward with that. I didn't follow the naming discussion as closely, and I don't really have an opinion. So here I suggest picking any name that was proposed, that you like, and that was not objected to. thanks, Tom