This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 05/15] Introduce and use debug_printf and debug_vprintf


Doug Evans wrote:
> Gary Benson writes:
> > 2014-07-09  Tom Tromey  <tromey@redhat.com>
> >             Gary Benson  <gbenson@redhat.com>
> > 
> >         * common/common-debug.h: New file.
> >         * utils.h: Include common-debug.h.
> >         * utils.c (debug_vprintf): New function.
> >         (debug_printf): Likewise.
> >         * common/agent.c (debug_agent_print): New function.
> >         (DEBUG_AGENT): Redefine.
> >         * nat/i386-dregs.c (debug_printf): Undefine.
> > 
> > gdb/gdbserver/
> > 2014-07-09  Tom Tromey  <tromey@redhat.com>
> >             Gary Benson  <gbenson@redhat.com>
> > 
> >         * utils.h: Include common-debug.h.
> >         * debug.h (debug_printf): Don't declare.
> >         * debug.c (debug_vprintf): New function.
> >         (debug_printf): Use the above.
> 
> IWBN if there was more file naming consistency.
> As a general rule, how objectionable is it to have gdb/foo.c
> and gdbserver/foo.c for every shared foo.h header?

I like it.

> [Or common-foo.h header in the case of, e.g., common/common-debug.h.]
> An alternative would be to move common-debug.h to a new directory,
> e.g., shared, and call it shared/debug.h.  I'm only mentioning this
> for discussion sake, it's not a requisite for this patch.

I have a script to automate the changes required so we can remove
"-I/path/to/gdb/common" from $CFLAGS.  This would allow GDB and/or
gdbserver to have their own "foo.h" that could include "common/foo.h".
The script also removes all the "common-" and "gdb_" prefixes from
header files in common.  I plan to submit a patch after this series
is in.  This means this series is creating files that will almost
immediately be moved, but the alternative is I end up having to
extensively fix this series (and I already did that once already!)

> In this case, any objection to putting the gdb implementation
> in gdb/debug.c instead of utils.c?

No objection from me, I'll do it.

Thanks,
Gary

-- 
http://gbenson.net/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]