This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Implement -exec-jump
On Wednesday 08 April 2009 10:53:22 Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Vladimir Prus <email@example.com>
> > Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 09:50:16 +0400
> > This patch, committed, implements the -exec-jump MI command.
> > (Documentation follows later)
> Please don't commit patches without the docs to go with them. Many
> people (and even distributions) use development snapshots or the CVS
> directly these days, and I would like to avoid the situation where
> they get features without documentation. I think we all should want
Don't you think that if some person, or distribution, grabs random state
from CVS, he should be capable of judging what he gets? If he is
incapable of such judgement, it is his problem.
> It is okay to _post_ a patch for review saying that the documentation
> patch will be _posted_ later, but actually _committing_ the code part
> is something very different.
Is this rule documented anywhere? And if it is, it is a very inconvenient
rule. It is much easier for me to find two chunks of time for code and
documentation separately, rather than finding large chunk of time to do
them both -- to the point where I might not be able to fix such small
issues at all. Do you think having a window of time where *development version*
has an undocumented feature that is primary targeted at *frontend developers*
is worse than not having that feature at all?