This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Add comments to gdbarch_address_class_name_to_type_flags
- From: Simon Marchi <simon dot marchi at ericsson dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj at redhat dot com>, GDB Patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:32:56 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add comments to gdbarch_address_class_name_to_type_flags
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <52D8293B dot 6060701 at ericsson dot com> <52D82EDF dot 5010402 at redhat dot com> <m3bnzbag2n dot fsf at redhat dot com> <52D8327D dot 7010403 at redhat dot com>
On 14-01-16 02:26 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 01/16/2014 07:21 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>> On Thursday, January 16 2014, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/16/2014 06:47 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
>>>> +/* Return the appropriate type_flags for the supplied address class.
>>>> + This function should return 1 if the address class was recognized and
>>>> + type_flags was set, zero otherwise.
>>>
>>> Say true/false instead of 1/zero.
>>
>> Sorry, but don't you think this is too nitpicking? And is also the
>> first time I remember seeing such requirement. I myself use "1/zero"
>> all the time, and I don't think this is an issue at all.
>
> It's really GDB's style throughout. It's not a big issue, and
> I'd really let it go if I didn't have any other comments. But since
> I was making other comments, I took the opportunity to point that
> out. Really not to be picky at all, but to take the chance
> to educate on GDB's style.
>
>> But I don't want to be meta-nitpicking, of course.
>
> Well, you sort of are. ;-)
>
I'm ok with that. Actually, I looked around to try to keep the same style, but I stumbled upon a "bad" example :P