This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 7.6 released!
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:23:58 +0300
- Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 7.6 released!
- References: <announce dot 20130426140741 dot GA13837 at adacore dot com> <83k3nptk18 dot fsf at gnu dot org> <837gjotnc9 dot fsf at gnu dot org> <20130428073805 dot GU3525 at adacore dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 11:38:05 +0400
> From: Joel Brobecker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: email@example.com
> > > The offending incomplete type is 'enum errors'.
> > Any reason not to include exceptions.h in utils.h, to avoid these
> > warnings?
> No objection from me. We'd then be able to remove the partial
> declaration of that enum.
OK, will install such a change (if, when the dust settles on the issue
you raise below, we decide to leave the function).
> I am wondering why we are not seeing this on other platforms...
Probably because I was using a _really_ old compiler (3.4.2) on the
machine where I saw this.
> utils.c:throw_perror_with_name doesn't appear to be used anywhere except
> in utils.c:perror_with_name, which is nothing more than a wrapper where
> errcode is set to GENERIC_ERROR. I am wondering if we want to keep that
> function around, or either make the function static, or inline its code
> in perror_with_name...
> I'd probably investigate why and when the function was introduced
> before making a decision, but I am running out of time for today...
It's not urgent.