From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 38705 invoked by alias); 24 May 2016 10:48:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 37181 invoked by uid 89); 24 May 2016 10:47:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=handy, H*M:88ae, thousand, pictures X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 24 May 2016 10:47:11 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AFFC1555D; Tue, 24 May 2016 10:46:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u4OAkpIV000795; Tue, 24 May 2016 06:46:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2][PR gdb/19893] Fix handling of synthetic C++ references To: Martin Galvan , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1464019228-11131-1-git-send-email-martin.galvan@tallertechnologies.com> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <04d07644-c6ed-88ae-f1de-cba46e875f2d@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:48:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1464019228-11131-1-git-send-email-martin.galvan@tallertechnologies.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg00417.txt.bz2 Hi Martin, This looks mostly good to me. However ... On 05/23/2016 05:00 PM, Martin Galvan wrote: > I've fixed a few things Pedro told me. Notice the printing of '@address' with 'set print object on' > is not necessarily a bug (the address that'll be shown is the referenced variable's, not something > like 0x0). If you ask me, I think we can just leave it as a (documented) corner case. ... I still don't know what to think of this -- I simply don't understand it whether you're doing this because it makes sense, or because doing otherwise would be hard to do? - Can you show an example output? (set print object on/off, etc. whatever might be handy to clearly explain that that is about). Pictures are really worth a thousand words. :-) - Is this covered by any testcase? I looked for "object" in the whole patch and didn't seem to find it. Thanks, Pedro Alves