From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id +PQvOMDoUmOPIg8AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:45:20 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id E1CEB1E112; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:45:20 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=WD1s9awZ; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,RDNS_DYNAMIC, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 934E71E0D5 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:45:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51213854171 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 18:45:19 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B51213854171 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1666377919; bh=KOKx78c8vNN0H09RDFf7OTsWDgCTLfDqnmzlXLWX570=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=WD1s9awZihmbl1DIDOGQLrNkWNwSMf9xGjMbWnYu/W8cpCHfUPQ2lLRoIAgAHMRDe RUds4ekOmHtlWJx2kDFdO2b7P/r5O4kWoVB3M8Q4QsT/9NcBjiJ25HGyU62vi0CWFN a76QzVapnunqc12Pmhnzqug/XcOpafyuyHHWLumU= Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D2F73856DC0 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 18:44:57 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9D2F73856DC0 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 29LIimPM018655 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:44:53 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 29LIimPM018655 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [217.28.27.60]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4E13C1E0D5; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:44:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <1962a74c-690c-518e-0bfb-1d9fa2876847@polymtl.ca> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:44:47 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/8] GDB/Guile: Don't assert that an integer value is boolean Content-Language: en-US To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Fri, 21 Oct 2022 18:44:48 +0000 X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Cc: Simon Sobisch , Tom Tromey Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2022-08-17 18:03, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > Do not assert that a value intended for an integer parameter, of either > the PARAM_UINTEGER or the PARAM_ZUINTEGER_UNLIMITED type, is boolean, > causing error messages such as: > > ERROR: In procedure make-parameter: > ERROR: In procedure gdbscm_make_parameter: Wrong type argument in position 15 (expecting integer or #:unlimited): 3 > Error while executing Scheme code. > > when initialization with a number is attempted. Instead assert that it > is integer. Keep matching `#:unlimited' keyword as an alternative. Add > suitable test cases. > --- > Hi, > > Probably obvious, and shows how much use this code gets. > > Maciej > > New change in v6. Hmm, I see this failure now: guile (set-parameter-value! test-PARAM_ZINTEGER-param #:unlimited)^M ERROR: In procedure set-parameter-value!:^M In procedure gdbscm_set_parameter_value_x: Wrong type argument in position 2 (expecting integer): #:unlimited^M Error while executing Scheme code.^M (gdb) FAIL: gdb.guile/scm-parameter.exp: kind=PARAM_ZINTEGER: test-PARAM_ZINTEGER-param: guile (set-parameter-value! test-PARAM_ZINTEGER-param #:unlimited) This is with Guile 3.0, if that matters. Simon