This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfa/c++testsuite] (was Re: patch for PR gdb/574)
- From: David Carlton <carlton at math dot stanford dot edu>
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com, mec at shout dot net
- Date: 27 Sep 2002 16:31:45 -0700
- Subject: Re: [rfa/c++testsuite] (was Re: patch for PR gdb/574)
- References: <15676.21042.125481.349851@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU><20020816032649.GA30528@nevyn.them.org><ro13ctewgca.fsf_-_@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU><ro1d6sarfad.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> <3D94E7AE.4090403@redhat.com>
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:20:14 -0400, Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com> said:
>> 2002-08-22 David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
>> * gdb.c++/pr-574.exp: New file.
>> * gdb.c++/pr-574.cc: New file.
>>
> Suggest a rename to c++/gdb574.*. MI's using that and got in just a
> tiny bit earlier :-)
Grump, grump, grump. Being a lazy person, I will give the following
justification for my naming scheme: you're proposing to change the PR
naming category so that that PR would turn into c++574. (Or do
existing closed PR's not get moved?) So it would make more sense to
call it gdb.c++/c++574.cc, which sounds silly: the whole directory is
about C++! And gdb.c++/gdb574.cc is only a little less silly, or
arguably even sillier: every single file in that directory, in its
parent, and in the parent of its parent is about GDB, so putting 'gdb'
in the name of a file is just plain old redundant. Whereas putting
'pr' in the name of a file isn't redundant at all.
Seriously, though, I'll change it to whatever name you want for
consistency's sake; but if that name involves the PR category, then we
might as well wate until the planned PR category change is completed.
David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu