From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1163 invoked by alias); 20 May 2003 21:01:33 -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 1116 invoked from network); 20 May 2003 21:01:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zenia.red-bean.com) (12.222.151.100) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 May 2003 21:01:32 -0000 Received: from zenia.red-bean.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zenia.red-bean.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h4KL90Fq024405; Tue, 20 May 2003 16:09:00 -0500 Received: (from jimb@localhost) by zenia.red-bean.com (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id h4KL8xid024401; Tue, 20 May 2003 16:08:59 -0500 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Naming dwarves References: <200305171253.h4HCrTT0012142@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <20030518043519.GA11124@nevyn.them.org> From: Jim Blandy Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 21:01:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20030518043519.GA11124@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00273.txt.bz2 What Elena and Andrew said about the current naming convention (dwarf2) is my understanding, too. But it's a bit confusing to talk about the modern Dwarf reader this way. If I say "the Dwarf reader", it's not clear that I don't mean Dwarf 1. (Which I never do.) If I say "the Dwarf 2 reader", then it sounds like I want to exclude the extensions in Dwarf 3. (Which I almost never do.) And I end up saying odd-sounding things like "the modern Dwarf reader". The major distinction between Dwarf 1 and Dwarf 2 was the introduction of the abbreviation table, introduced because Dwarf 1 was even more enormous than Dwarf 2 is. But since that change, Dwarf has been able to grow pretty well, and incorporate major improvements like duplicate suppression, without breaking compatibility again. So I wonder if we won't eventually have a reader named dwarf2 that handles Dwarf 2, 3, and 4. Would it make sense to, at some point (not today) adopt "dwarf1" as the prefix for the dwarf1 reader, and simply "dwarf" for the modern Dwarf reader? For what it's worth, the latest Dwarf spec usually just calls it "DWARF".