This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com 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]

Re: [rfa] signals 1/3 - move target_signal handling out of target.c


On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 06:00:46PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > 
> > I can't really think of a better name than target_signal.
> 
> 
> Problem I have with ``target signal'' is that I'm never sure if I'm 
> talking about a ``target signal'' or a ``target_signal''. 
> ``gdb_signal'' while contrived, is probably less ambigious.
> 
> One warped convention is to use ``siggnal'' [sic].  I don't know that 
> that is any better than ``signals''.

I'd prefer to stick with target_signal unless you've got a strong
preference.  gdb_signal doesn't seem to gain us especially much.


-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


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