From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13623 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2002 17:55:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13613 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2002 17:55:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Sep 2002 17:55:48 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17rjzH-000666-00; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 13:55:47 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17rj3G-0003IB-00; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 13:55:50 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 10:55:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Cc: carlton@math.stanford.edu Subject: Re: PATCH: gdb/709, C++ static members Message-ID: <20020918175550.GA12529@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, carlton@math.stanford.edu References: <20020918154026.GA24749@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020918154026.GA24749@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00410.txt.bz2 On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 11:40:26AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > David, your earlier patch: > > * values.c (value_static_field): Treat an unresolved location the > same as a nonexistent symbol. Fix PR gdb/635. > > pointed me in the right direction for this fix. As you may have pointed out > at the time, read_var_value does basically the same thing your fix does in > that case. It turns out that there's some other cases - this particular one > was LOC_CONST_BYTES - where read_var_value does the right thing and > value_static_field doesn't. So I just had value_static_field call > read_var_value, which fixes your testcase and also a new one I'll post later > for gdb/709. > > Committed, since static members are a C++ thing. And on the branch, since it got reported in GNATS twice in one day... -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer