This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: [commit] cleanup stale exec.{h|c} xfer_memory comments.

> From: Pedro Alves <>
> Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 12:50:02 +0100
> Cc:
> The other exported functions of exec.c were
> described in the header (and the ones that are new came from
> target.h, that describes many function in the header too, including
> the ones related to section_table_xfer_memory_partial).  I thought
> I'd follow suit for consistency with the surrounding code.

I didn't know that exec.c describes functions in the headers.  I'm
traveling and have no easy access to GDB sources.  I just saw that you
removed the description from exec.c and added the more accurate one to

> > 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.  
> Fine with me.  But if we're going to move the description of
> this function, we should move all the others in exec.h too.  Shall
> I do this, or do you want to do it?

I will be able to do that only  in a few days, when I return home.  So
if you have time before that, please do it.  Or maybe we should wait
for others to chime in: this is a matter of personal preferences, and
I've been burned before asking to adhere to mine.

> > This is C, not C++, so the interface and the implementation are 
> > not separated.
> I must not understand header files then.  (I've no idea why C++
> is being referenced here.)

Forget it.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]