On May 14, 3:00pm, Kevin Buettner wrote:
I'll adopt the following naming scheme:
rawnums - for code which uses and should continue to use raw numbers
cookednums - for code which uses and should continue to use cooked
numbers
regnums - for one of two cases, either code that's currently using
raw numbers that should be converted to be cooked, or
for code which I'm unsure of. (Either case, these'll
be raw numbers. When someone converts the code or decides
that the "raw" usage is correct, the name should be
changed.)
For the last category, I'm open to suggestions for some other name.
I've decided I don't like the name "regnums" that well for the last
category. I've settled on the name "rawnums_c" instead. The "_c"
suffix indicates that they *should* be cooked. (Yes, it's terse, but I
fear that anything longer will make the code unwieldy.) I'll also put
in a comment at each ``rawnums_c'' initialization indicating that the
code needs to be converted at some point to use cooked register
numbers. E.g.:
/* This function needs to be converted to use cooked register numbers. */
const struct mips_regnums *rawnums_c = mips_raw_regnums (gdbarch);