From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Per Bothner <per@bothner.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Fix PR gdb/265, 64-bit pointers in Java
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 18:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020220210457.A11990@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C744DC0.1090902@bothner.com>
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 05:30:40PM -0800, Per Bothner wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >Well, it does not silently change the type for conforming input;
> >integers will still be marked as integers. The patch allows us to accept
> >things like:
> >(gdb) x/i 0x123456789
> >
> >which really ought to work.
>
> I'm not 100% convinced, but it's at least reasonable.
>
> >If you disagree with me on that, which you certainly can :), then I
> >would prefer to have a flag for parse_number saying it created an
> >implicit long and cause errors if the expression being evaluated is a
> >method call, etc. I'm not convinced that's worth the trouble.
>
> An idea: If it overflows, set the type to builtin_type_uint64, or some
> similar type, but don't set it to java_type_long. That way we still
> get x/i 0x123456789 to do the expected, but we can (if we wanted to)
> catch incorrectly passing 0x123456789 to a Java method.
I like it.
> This is similar to how G++ treets jint (__java_int), as a different
> integer type than int, so it can can programs that try to incorrectly
> pass an 'int' to a Java method.
>
> If you change it to:
>
> if (type == java_int_type && n > (ULONGEST)0x80000000)
> type = builtin_type_uint64;
>
> then that would satisfy me.
This look OK? Note the comment.
Index: jv-exp.y
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/jv-exp.y,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 jv-exp.y
--- jv-exp.y 2002/02/20 22:41:52 1.4
+++ jv-exp.y 2002/02/21 02:04:19
@@ -797,8 +797,13 @@ parse_number (p, len, parsed_float, puti
n += c;
}
- if (type == java_int_type && n > (ULONGEST)0xffffffff)
- type = java_long_type;
+ /* If the type is bigger than a 32-bit signed integer can be, implicitly
+ promote to long. Java does not do this, so mark it as builtin_type_uint64
+ rather than java_long_type. 0x80000000 will become -0x80000000 instead
+ of 0x80000000L, because we don't know the sign at this point.
+ */
+ if (type == java_int_type && n > (ULONGEST)0x80000000)
+ type = builtin_type_uint64;
putithere->typed_val_int.val = n;
putithere->typed_val_int.type = type;
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-21 2:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-10 21:38 Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-11 10:24 ` Tom Tromey
2002-02-11 10:31 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-20 14:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-20 15:04 ` Per Bothner
2002-02-20 15:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-20 17:30 ` Per Bothner
2002-02-20 18:05 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2002-02-20 18:11 ` Per Bothner
2002-02-20 18:55 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020220210457.A11990@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=per@bothner.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox