On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:01 AM, John Marino <gnu...@marino.st> wrote: > On 4/16/2014 03:22, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Douglas B Rupp <r...@adacore.com> wrote: >>> On 04/14/2014 02:01 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >>> >>> No I considered that but I think that number will be very small. Will you >>> concede, in hindsight, that it would be better had the name been chosen to >>> be more unique? >> >> No, I won't concede that. The unwind.h file provides the interface >> for the C++ exception handling interface >> (http://mentorembedded.github.io/cxx-abi/abi-eh.html). That interface >> is implemented by several different compilers, not just GCC. > > The header can provide the exact same interface with a different, better > file name. > > He's basically asking, "If you had it to do all over again, would you > still call it unwind.h or would you call it something different?" > > It's just an academic discussion because answering yes or no changes > nothing, but I think the majority of the people would give it a > different file name if they could do it all over again. It's not a big > concession.
I agree that it doesn't matter at this date, but I would still vote to call it unwind.h. It's a good descriptive name for the interface described by the file. I certainly wouldn't call it unwind-gcc.h; it's intentionally not GCC-specific. Ian
