* [RFA] stabs tweak -- forward reference types
@ 2004-11-11 21:12 Michael Snyder
2004-11-11 21:30 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Michael Snyder @ 2004-11-11 21:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: jimb, ezannoni
Jim, Elena,
There was a change about two years ago, related to G++ and derived classes.
See "complain_about_struct_wipeout" for comments.
I have evidence that this change was too aggressive, and that it sometimes
interferes with the resolution of forward referenced struct pointer types.
Unfortunately, I'm not having any luck constructing a small testcase.
So I hope to convince you that the small change proposed below is harmless.
According to the comments, the earlier change was only concerned with
derived types. If we check N_BASECLASS and see that a type has no
base classes, then it should be safe. Yes?
I've confirmed that the present change has positive side effects -- it
results in forward references being resolved that were being left
unresolved before. I don't know how to confirm that it has no negative
side effects, since I don't know how to test the earlier derived class issue.
Michael
2004-11-11 msnyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
* stabsread.c (read_struct_type): complain_about_struct_wipeout
only if struct is a derived type.
Index: stabsread.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/stabsread.c,v
retrieving revision 1.77
diff -p -r1.77 stabsread.c
*** stabsread.c 30 Apr 2004 14:40:54 -0000 1.77
--- stabsread.c 11 Nov 2004 21:04:52 -0000
*************** read_struct_type (char **pp, struct type
*** 3294,3303 ****
if (! (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_UNDEF
|| TYPE_STUB (type)))
{
! complain_about_struct_wipeout (type);
! /* It's probably best to return the type unchanged. */
! return type;
}
back_to = make_cleanup (null_cleanup, 0);
--- 3294,3309 ----
if (! (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_UNDEF
|| TYPE_STUB (type)))
{
! /* Well, the above should only apply if type *has* a baseclass.
! Otherwise, we may interfere with the resolution of forward
! referenced struct types. */
! if (TYPE_N_BASECLASSES (type) > 0)
! {
! complain_about_struct_wipeout (type);
! /* It's probably best to return the type unchanged. */
! return type;
! }
}
back_to = make_cleanup (null_cleanup, 0);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: [RFA] stabs tweak -- forward reference types
2004-11-11 21:12 [RFA] stabs tweak -- forward reference types Michael Snyder
@ 2004-11-11 21:30 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2004-11-11 21:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Snyder; +Cc: gdb-patches, jimb, ezannoni
On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 01:12:12PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Jim, Elena,
>
> There was a change about two years ago, related to G++ and derived classes.
> See "complain_about_struct_wipeout" for comments.
>
> I have evidence that this change was too aggressive, and that it sometimes
> interferes with the resolution of forward referenced struct pointer types.
> Unfortunately, I'm not having any luck constructing a small testcase.
Can you construct one just using .stabs directives? This is what
gdb.stabs (and gdb.dwarf2) are for.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-11-11 21:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-11-11 21:12 [RFA] stabs tweak -- forward reference types Michael Snyder
2004-11-11 21:30 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox