This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [doc RFA] Switch to GCC coding style
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Ken Werner <ken at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 19:10:03 +0100
- Subject: Re: [doc RFA] Switch to GCC coding style
- References: <201010221920.30046.ken@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20101026195747.GE2847@adacore.com> <20101027190417.GA19067@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201010272020.51386.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20101102165134.GA19296@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <AANLkTimWg8HcVGa756vxHr=azHZTxU7KwrH+m_E+XBrV@mail.gmail.com> <20101102180110.GB2492@adacore.com>
On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 19:01:10 +0100, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > There are lots of things on the gcc codingconventions page that need
> > to be converted (e.g., gcc_assert), or revised (e.g., prototypes for
> > _initialize_foo fns can appear in .c files (and should *only* appear
> > in .c files)).
> >
> > I'm not sure, but it might be simpler to just copy over the relevant bits.
>
> This is something I was thinking about as well. I think we should have
> our own Wiki page for conventions. That way, we can document our own
> specific requirements (gdb_assert, etc).
The current code is not strictly compliant to any standard anyway. And I do
not think GDB wants to needlessly diverge from GCC on GCC Conventions updates
in the future. These were the reasons why I prefer just referencing GCC
Conventions.
Thanks,
Jan