This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [commit] cleanup stale exec.{h|c} xfer_memory comments.
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:47:05 -0400
- Subject: Re: [commit] cleanup stale exec.{h|c} xfer_memory comments.
- References: <200906121943.08246.pedro@codesourcery.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:43:07 +0100
>
> The comment describing section_table_xfer_memory_partial is actually
> still describing the old xfer_memory. This removes that stale
> description, and adjusts the description in the header a bit better
> to current reality.
Is the convention to describe functions in headers? That's reasonable
for data structures, but we have a lot of functions documented right
before their source, not in the headers. I find the documentation in
the .c files easier to use, because you don't need to consult another
file. This is C, not C++, so the interface and the implementation are
not separated.