This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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 23 Jun 2015 11:28, Doug Evans wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 22 Jun 2015 17:29, Doug Evans wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >> > Keeping track of the right printf formats for the various types can be > >> > a pretty big hassle, especially in common code which has to support a > >> > variety of bitsizes. Take a page from the existing standards and add > >> > a set of PRI macros which hide the details in a common header. > >> > --- > >> > sim/common/ChangeLog | 8 ++++++++ > >> > sim/common/sim-types.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+) > >> > > >> > diff --git a/sim/common/ChangeLog b/sim/common/ChangeLog > >> > index 722ad98..db67a1d 100644 > >> > --- a/sim/common/ChangeLog > >> > +++ b/sim/common/ChangeLog > >> > @@ -1,5 +1,13 @@ > >> > 2015-06-21 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> > >> > > >> > + * sim-types.h (_SIM_PRI_TB, __SIM_PRI_TB): New helper macros for > >> > + expanding target bitsizes into standard PRI formats. > >> > + (PRI_TW, PRIiTW, PRIxTW): New PRI target word defines. > >> > + (PRI_TA, PRIiTA, PRIxTA): New PRI target address defines. > >> > + (PRI_TF, PRIiTF, PRIxTF): New PRI target floating point defines. > >> > + > >> > >> It's not that big a deal, but _[_A-Z]+ is reserved for the compiler. > > > > i'm aware of that rule, but it hasn't really stopped us in the code base from > > using the _xxx namespace. the sim-bits.h header in particular uses this to mark > > the internal macros as such. > > > > i'm certainly open to a diff convention of clearly conveying "this is internal" > > if gdb has such a thing. although it too uses _xxx in a few places :). > > How about a rule saying to avoid _[_A-Z] going forward, > and we'll fix the existing cases if/when we get to them. > ? what's the proposed replacement ? :) GDB__XXX & SIM__XXX ? -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |