Re: Patches to move cgen files to C90 with prototypes

[Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>]

Hi Michael, Hi Doug,

>>  > 2003-08-06  Michael Meissner  <gnu@the-meissners.org>
>>  > 
>>  >      ... massively large changelog entry,
>>  >      ... especially for just a k&r -> c90 substitution
>> 
>> fwiw, I think people think they're under far too much pressure to
>> write anally correct changelog entries before a patch will get accepted.
>
> I don't care one way or another, as I can rewrite it however people want.  I do
> recall it came up in GCC about a year ago, with people complaining that they
> wanted to be able to grep for each function modified, and in particular didn't
> want things like:
>
> 	* ({put,get}_some_function): Blah, blah, blah.
>
>> Nick, in this particular case, does one really have to mention every function?
>> How about this instead?

No I think that the functions should be mentioned.

I have objection to listing them together though, rather than one per
line.  ie something like this would be OK:

	* cgen-dis.in (print_normal): Remove PARAMS macro.  Use void *
	instead of PTR.
	(print_address, print_keyword, print_insn_normal, print_insn,
	default_print_insn, read_insn): Likewise.
	(print_normal): Prototype definition.  Use void * instead of PTR.
	(print_address, print_keyword, print_insn_normal, read_insn,
	print_insn, default_print_insn, print_insn_@arch@): Likewise.

(I prefer "likewise" to "ditto" but this is a personal thing).

Cheers
        Nick