Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > Hmm, attribs.c to me is a perfect abbreviation to attributes.c, so it isn't > > unclear (to me) ... there are more confusing file names, like tree-dfa.c > > or tree-flow*.[ch]. > > > I also can't imagine what else attrib.c would be other than attribu

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 16:41:36 -0400 Diego Novillo wrote: > > You keep overgeneralizing and I think it is misleading. > > Existing reviewers will object to certain renames and/or cleanups when > they do not see a compelling value proposition. If you think that > your change brings value, but the

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Diego Novillo
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 15:03, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:36:21 +0200 (CEST) > "Nicola Pero" wrote: > >> > Huh, I see no reason for this rename.  It'll just make patches across >> > releases harder. >> >> Sure.  But any change will make "patches across releases harder" .

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:36:21 +0200 (CEST) "Nicola Pero" wrote: > > Huh, I see no reason for this rename. It'll just make patches across > > releases harder. > > Sure. But any change will make "patches across releases harder" ... does > it mean we can't make any changes - not even in phase 1 ?

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:09:33 -0400 Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > > Hmm, attribs.c to me is a perfect abbreviation to attributes.c, so it isn't > > unclear (to me) ... there are more confusing file names, like tree-dfa.c > > or tree-flow*.[ch]. > > > I also can't imagine what else attrib.c would be o

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011, Nicola Pero wrote: > > Huh, I see no reason for this rename. It'll just make patches across > > releases harder. > > Sure. But any change will make "patches across releases harder" ... does > it mean we can't make any changes - not even in phase 1 ? :-( I think moving file

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Andrew MacLeod
Hmm, attribs.c to me is a perfect abbreviation to attributes.c, so it isn't unclear (to me) ... there are more confusing file names, like tree-dfa.c or tree-flow*.[ch]. I also can't imagine what else attrib.c would be other than attributes...

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Richard Guenther
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:36 PM, Nicola Pero wrote: >> Huh, I see no reason for this rename.  It'll just make patches across >> releases harder. > > Sure.  But any change will make "patches across releases harder" ... does > it mean we can't make any changes - not even in phase 1 ? :-( No, not in

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Nicola Pero
> Huh, I see no reason for this rename. It'll just make patches across > releases harder. Sure. But any change will make "patches across releases harder" ... does it mean we can't make any changes - not even in phase 1 ? :-( The reason I'd like to change the name is that "attribs.c" is meaningl

Re: Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Richard Guenther
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Nicola Pero wrote: > This patch renames attribs.c to attributes.c. > > I can only imagine the short "attribs.c" name was picked many years ago > due to filename restrictions on certain systems ?  Nowadays, it seems > that we already have plenty of long filenames in

Rename attribs.c to attributes.c

2011-06-22 Thread Nicola Pero
This patch renames attribs.c to attributes.c. I can only imagine the short "attribs.c" name was picked many years ago due to filename restrictions on certain systems ? Nowadays, it seems that we already have plenty of long filenames inside GCC, so there is no reason to use cryptic, newbie-unfrien