[RFA] let record_resume fail immediately on error
Hui Zhu
teawater@gmail.com
Wed Nov 11 00:55:00 GMT 2009
The callers are very lazy, they like call a function directly. :)
Thanks,
Hui
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:04, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> ">" == Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> It add a new argument "catch" to do_record_message. If catch is true,
>>> it will call "record_message" with catch errors. If not, it will call
>>> "record_message" directly.
>
> I don't like this much either. It is trivial for callers that want to
> catch errors to catch them. They can use TRY_CATCH or catch_errors(...,
> record_message).
>
> Callers that don't want to catch errors should just call
> do_record_message directly. This is both for type safety and also
> because such calls are plain old C, and should therefore look like it.
>
> Tom
>
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list