From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com>
To: chastain@cygnus.com, fnasser@cygnus.com
Cc: ac131313@cygnus.com, fnasser@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, keiths@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] Assuming malloc exists in callfwmall.exp
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:30:00 -0000
Message-id: <200102152030.MAA27123@bosch.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00264.html

Hi Fernando,

> And if he/she is a really good maintainer he/she will reject your patch
> as it would be adding a restriction to inferior function calls that we
> do not currently have.

This is bothering me.

I've seen some real "this is so embarrassing I should wear a brown
paper bag over my head" bugs:

  (gdb) set input-radix 2
  Input radix now set to decimal 4294967295, hex ffffffff, octal 37777777777.

Sorry if I make the author of that bug blush.   My point is that this
happens in software, and that it's the job of the test suite to detect
when it happens.

Michael