From: "Agovic, Sanimir" <sanimir.agovic@intel.com>
To: 'Joel Brobecker' <brobecker@adacore.com>
Cc: "tromey@redhat.com" <tromey@redhat.com>,
"palves@redhat.com" <palves@redhat.com>,
"xdje42@gmail.com" <xdje42@gmail.com>,
"gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
"Boell, Keven" <keven.boell@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 00/13] C99 variable length array support
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0377C58828D86C4588AEEC42FC3B85A7176D363F@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140115114133.GA26593@adacore.com>
Thanks for your review.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf
> Of Joel Brobecker
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 12:42 PM
> To: Agovic, Sanimir
> Cc: tromey@redhat.com; palves@redhat.com; xdje42@gmail.com; gdb-patches@sourceware.org;
> Boell, Keven
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] C99 variable length array support
>
> Hello,
>
> > this patch series (v3) add C99 variable length support to gdb.
> >
> > It allows the user to evaluate a vla like an ordinary static array e.g. print
> > its elements instead of printing the pointer to the array. In addition
> > the size of a vla can be retrieved with gdbs builtin sizeof operator.
>
> We've started working internally at AdaCore on getting rid of some
> of the "GNAT encodings", with the goal of replacing them with pure
> dwarf constructs. One of the issues we've noticed is precisely
> the lack of support for dynamically-sized arrays, and I think
> this patch series would be a very good stepping stone towards that.
>
It would be great if gnat could benefit from c99 and the upcoming fortran vla
support. I hacked on the D and go-lang compiler and could get variable length
arrays working without additional changes to gdb, simply by changing what the
compiler emits for ranges.
> I remember I had one patch that made me a little nervous (patch #5/13,
> adding type re-fecthing after some value_* calls), but I also said
> that I would be OK if the patch went in as is. Apart from that,
> it seems to me that most/all? comments have been addressed?
> Perhaps, all we're missing is just v4 of the patch series?
>
If it is OK for you I`d like to keep #5 as-is. AFAIK struct value
is opaque outside of its definition so any knowledge about how it works
(e.g. how values are constructed) means we leak implementation details.
> Any chance we could make progress on those? If there is anything
> I can do to assist, please let me know as well!
>
Sure, I`m back and willing to address the missing parts =D
-Sanimir
Intel GmbH
Dornacher Strasse 1
85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen, Deutschland
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Christian Lamprechter, Hannes Schwaderer, Douglas Lusk
Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456
Ust.-IdNr./VAT Registration No.: DE129385895
Citibank Frankfurt a.M. (BLZ 502 109 00) 600119052
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-16 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-04 14:20 Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:20 ` [PATCH v3 02/13] type: add c99 " Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:20 ` [PATCH v3 01/13] vla: introduce new bound type abstraction adapt uses Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:21 ` [PATCH v3 08/13] vla: resolve dynamic bounds if value contents is a constant byte-sequence Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:21 ` [PATCH v3 12/13] test: basic c99 vla tests for C primitives Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:21 ` [PATCH v3 04/13] vla: enable sizeof operator for indirection Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:21 ` [PATCH v3 06/13] vla: print "dynamic length" for unresolved dynamic bounds Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:21 ` [PATCH v3 07/13] vla: support for DW_AT_count Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:21 ` [PATCH v3 03/13] vla: enable sizeof operator to work with variable length arrays Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:22 ` [PATCH v3 11/13] test: evaluate pointers to C99 vla correctly Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:22 ` [PATCH v3 10/13] test: multi-dimensional c99 vla Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:22 ` [PATCH v3 09/13] test: cover subranges with present DW_AT_count attribute Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:22 ` [PATCH v3 06/13] vla: print "variable length" for unresolved dynamic bounds Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:23 ` [PATCH v3 13/13] test: add mi vla test Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-04 14:23 ` [PATCH v3 05/13] vla: update type from newly created value Sanimir Agovic
2013-12-06 7:36 ` Doug Evans
2013-12-16 15:21 ` Agovic, Sanimir
2013-12-16 17:58 ` Doug Evans
2014-01-15 11:41 ` [PATCH v3 00/13] C99 variable length array support Joel Brobecker
2014-01-15 16:15 ` Tom Tromey
2014-01-15 17:54 ` Joel Brobecker
2014-01-15 18:00 ` Tom Tromey
2014-01-16 17:00 ` Agovic, Sanimir [this message]
2014-01-16 17:30 ` Tom Tromey
2014-01-17 2:23 ` Joel Brobecker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0377C58828D86C4588AEEC42FC3B85A7176D363F@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=sanimir.agovic@intel.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=keven.boell@intel.com \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=xdje42@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox