This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch 1/9]#2 Rename `enum target_signal' to target_signal_t
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:28:29 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch 1/9]#2 Rename `enum target_signal' to target_signal_t
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:08:14 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> It does not matter much to me if we decide to allow types named with
> a _t suffix. But the gdb_ prefix also increases the chances of avoiding
> name collisions with external declarations.
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:11:45 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> A strange ruling, I think _t is used in lots of applications.
I would prefer gdb_target_signal_t or also gdb_target_signal.
Is one of those approved?
Now I probably won't extend target_signal by any new fields (as the logic can
be kept inside linux-nat.c) so this part remains only as a "code cleanup" to
better sanity check the types compatibility (by the struct wrapping). There
have been caught several minor bugs already before and in this patchset.
Thanks,
Jan