Re: [RFA]: Remove unused header files.

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

"J.T. Conklin" wrote:

> However, I question whether it has to be.  Why should GDB have obscure
> and effectively hidden include dependencies?  We can eliminate them so
> that *.c files include the headers that are required by all configs,
> and have tm-, nm-, or xm- headers that require extra headers due to
> macro definitions to include them themselves.  Alternatively, we can
> include all the headers in defs.h to ensure that all such headers have
> access to the declarations.  I'm not fond of the latter --- I'm trying
> to decrease the number of headers being processed for each module, not
> increase them.

Definitly not the latter.  I've seen project build times cripped through
things like that.

> I think requiring the tm-, nm-, and xm- headers to include dependent
> headers is desirable.  While it will add some compilation overhead to
> some configs, it should be only until they are multi-arched.  That can
> be addressed even before multi-arch, since the macros can be converted
> to functions and moved to the appropriate -tdep.c or -nat.c file.

Yes, agreed.

I was originally going to add a #include "regcache.h" to values.c but
thought better of it for that exact reason.

	Andrew