This is the mail archive of the gdb@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] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 09:43:35AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
However, now that the patches are finally here, I have to say that I sort of share Mark K's concerns. I'm wondering if we are on a slippery slope and (to mix a metaphor) will be subjecting gdb to a death-by-inches as we slowly add ifdefs throughout the configury and code.
I think it's a funny time to get concerned -- we're done.
For now. Didn't you just theorize more involvement from the MinGW community now that your patch is in?
I guess the failure mode will be roughly similar to DJGPP. Every time someone decides that it would be nice to use signal(), select(), fifos, inodes, unix-domain sockets, or some other non-msdos construct there will have to be a discussion about how to make things work. But, I guess we'd already be having this discussion to with DJGPP so maybe it won't be a big deal.
I certainly don't think the entire codebase will be littered with HANDLEs and ReadFileEx, or transformed into a multi-threaded application with a Windows event loop in the middle of it, or anything like that.
No, but maybe we should rewrite gdb in c++. That sounds like it would solve everything. :-)
-- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC mark@codesourcery.com (916) 791-8304
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |