This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ping: [gcc patch] libcc1: '@' GDB array operator
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Manuel LÃpez-IbÃÃez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>, Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, Tom Tromey <tom at tromey dot com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 16:27:28 +0200
- Subject: Re: ping: [gcc patch] libcc1: '@' GDB array operator
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <556F430F dot 7060807 at gmail dot com> <556F155C dot 1030300 at redhat dot com> <20150603205742 dot GA5676 at host1 dot jankratochvil dot net> <CAESRpQBK-DgFLe+NM6OrVZ3LuRMH50XyTwHu4XM6wJaQvKks_w at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150604073608 dot GA1294 at host1 dot jankratochvil dot net> <557059F2 dot 1090900 at redhat dot com>
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:00:18 +0200, Jeff Law wrote:
> But my assertion is that stuff like what you've shown above simply isn't
> important to handle. What we need to look at are the common cases and I
> haven't seen a strong argument that the common cases can't be handled by
> gdb.
If we target only 99% of cases then sure GDB-side is enough.
Still the GDB side will be more code and IMHO at an inappropriate place.
I was tought + expect that in GNU world it does not matter where a feature is
implemented, it is more important to be implemented at the right place.
All the reasons have been already exchanged and I read between lines GCC still
does not want to accept this feature so I will reimplement it in GDB only.
Jan