From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9124 invoked by alias); 2 Jan 2008 16:42:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 9083 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jan 2008 16:42:19 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from igw2.br.ibm.com (HELO igw2.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:35:37 +0000 Received: from mailhub3.br.ibm.com (mailhub3 [9.18.232.110]) by igw2.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D08D117F4AE for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 14:29:15 -0200 (BRDT) Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (d24av02.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.47]) by mailhub3.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m02GYbQD3919932 for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 14:34:37 -0200 Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m02GYbun009743 for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 14:34:37 -0200 Received: from [9.18.238.251] (dyn532128.br.ibm.com [9.18.238.251]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m02GYbtl009740; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 14:34:37 -0200 Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Wrap-up expression support for DFP. From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: References: <20071220054926.148275471@br.ibm.com> <20071220055107.194393592@br.ibm.com> <1198816387.12907.62.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:42:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1199291677.12907.67.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 13:47 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Thiago Jung Bauermann > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 02:33:07 -0200 > > > > I couldn't find an appropriate place to put these in the manual, so I > > went ahead and created a new sub-section, under "Examining Data". What > > do you think? > > I think a better place is in the "C and C++" section. These are C/C++ > data types, aren't they? > > > +There are two encodings in use, depending on the architecture: BID (Binary > > +Integer Decimal) for x86 and x86-64, and DPD (Densely Packed Decimal) for > > +PowerPC. GDB will use the appropriate encoding for the configured target. > > PLease use "@value{GDBN}" instead of a literal "GDB". > > > +Because of a limitation in libdecnumber, the library used by @value{GDBN} > > "libdecnumber" is a file name, so it should have the @file markup. > > > +point computations, error checking in decimal float operations ignore underflow, > > "ignores". > > Other than these comments, the patch is okay to go in (as a subsection > of the "C and C++" section. Ok, changed the patch to abide to all observations above. I will commit it when the code patch is approved as well. Thanks for your review. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann Software Engineer IBM Linux Technology Center