From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10617 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2001 02:25:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10493 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 02:25:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by hostedprojects.ges.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Nov 2001 02:25:10 -0000 Received: from cse.cygnus.com (cse.cygnus.com [205.180.230.236]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21868; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:25:05 -0800 (PST) Received: (from kev@localhost) by cse.cygnus.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA10257; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:24:40 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:34:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1011127022440.ZM10256@ocotillo.lan> In-Reply-To: Daniel Jacobowitz "Re: [RFA/c++] Fix printing classes with virtual base classes" (Nov 26, 9:02pm) References: <20011126201945.A27754@nevyn.them.org> <20011126210231.A32203@nevyn.them.org> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0.1 13Jan97 Caldera) To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/c++] Fix printing classes with virtual base classes Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00253.txt.bz2 On Nov 26, 9:02pm, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 08:19:45PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > Whew. Finally tracked this down. > > [snip correct explanation] > > [snip incorrect patch] > > I find the use of VALUE_OFFSET and VALUE_EMBEDDED_OFFSET exceedingly > unintuitive. Go figure. This one works a little bit better yet. > > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University > MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer > > 2001-11-26 Daniel Jacobowitz > > * gnu-v3-abi.c (gnuv3_rtti_type): Explicitly cast > the vtable pointer to a pointer before loading it. > (gnuv3_virtual_fn_field): Likewise. I don't have any comments on Daniel's patch, but I am wondering who will approve this. Given that we currently have no C++ maintainer, should we treat Daniel's patch as an RFC and have him commit it after a few days if there are no objections? Kevin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Buettner To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz Subject: Re: [RFA/c++] Fix printing classes with virtual base classes Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:25:00 -0000 Message-ID: <1011127022440.ZM10256@ocotillo.lan> References: <20011126201945.A27754@nevyn.them.org> <20011126210231.A32203@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2001-11/msg00468.html Message-ID: <20011126182500.CALu0cX_9wPlx1REUUkS2s-RYz1TTYHdf6LMegXyOFE@z> On Nov 26, 9:02pm, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 08:19:45PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > Whew. Finally tracked this down. > > [snip correct explanation] > > [snip incorrect patch] > > I find the use of VALUE_OFFSET and VALUE_EMBEDDED_OFFSET exceedingly > unintuitive. Go figure. This one works a little bit better yet. > > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University > MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer > > 2001-11-26 Daniel Jacobowitz > > * gnu-v3-abi.c (gnuv3_rtti_type): Explicitly cast > the vtable pointer to a pointer before loading it. > (gnuv3_virtual_fn_field): Likewise. I don't have any comments on Daniel's patch, but I am wondering who will approve this. Given that we currently have no C++ maintainer, should we treat Daniel's patch as an RFC and have him commit it after a few days if there are no objections? Kevin