From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7154 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2004 07:17:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7129 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2004 07:17:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.hispeed.ch) (62.2.95.247) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 8 Oct 2004 07:17:16 -0000 Received: from indel.ch (217-162-27-127.dclient.hispeed.ch [217.162.27.127]) by smtp.hispeed.ch (8.12.6/8.12.6/tornado-1.0) with SMTP id i987HF6O015850 for ; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:17:15 +0200 Received: from fabi.indel.ch [192.168.1.19] by indel.ch [127.0.0.1] with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.7.SP5.R) for ; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 09:16:37 +0200 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.1.20041008090820.0abedf30@NT_SERVER> X-Sender: cenedese@NT_SERVER (Unverified) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 08:54:00 -0000 To: From: Fabian Cenedese Subject: RE: Discussion: Formalizing the deprecation process in GDB In-Reply-To: References: <416562C9.90801@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com X-Return-Path: cenedese@indel.ch X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00240.txt.bz2 >> A running joke between several of the GDB developers at the last GCC >> summit was that we should present a 1hr paper titled "porting >> GDB to a >> new architecture". Only instead of presenting slides, we'd >> just write the code. > > I find it hard to believe that's possible for anyone who comes to the code >from fresh. You have spent years working with gdb and have the advantage of >knowing your way round the code, and what the replacements for each >deprecated thing are; anyone else has to do lots of research. If there's >going to be a formalization of the deprecation process, my 'feature request' >would be that there be one single central place where all deprecated >features are listed together with brief pointers to the new functionality >that has taken their place. I also have been looking for this kind of document as I have come across deprecated functions. As I couldn't find something I started using them knowing that the code won't be accepted like this. Following now this discussion that would mean that I haven't read the accompanying comments of the deprecated functions or I would have seen the proposed replacements. I guess I need to look harder. So even if you don't come to a conclusion you have helped a newbie :) Thanks bye Fabi