[commit] Deprecate remaining STREQ uses

Kevin Buettner kevinb@redhat.com
Thu Dec 4 04:44:00 GMT 2003

On Nov 27,  9:30am, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> > Even if the process isn't entirely automated, it's still sometimes
> > better to do the conversion all at once.  By deprecating something,
> > you're forcing someone else (or even a later version of yourself) to
> > deal with the problem later on.
> If a contributor wants to add new code, or fix bugs in existing code, 
> they should not be increasing the use of existing deprecated mechanisms 
> (after all we should be able to reasonably expect contributors to not 
> make matters worse).  The prime motivator here should our joint goal to 
> make GDB the best debgger possible, and more immediatly our desire to 
> fix bugs such as those identified by my rewritten structs.exp.  As for 
> other code, let it bitrot and die.

I agree with much of what you say, but I really can't agree with the
last part.  There is a quite a lot of code which simply cannot be
allowed to "bitrot and die".

I have already stated that I think the renaming of deprecated
interfaces is okay in some instances.  I am concerned, however, that
this approach is being used in instances where it doesn't really
need to be.


More information about the Gdb-patches mailing list