From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16496 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2003 17:31:18 -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 16346 invoked from network); 17 Feb 2003 17:31:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 17 Feb 2003 17:31:18 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18kqzt-0001un-00; Mon, 17 Feb 2003 13:32:13 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18kp6i-00056U-00; Mon, 17 Feb 2003 12:31:08 -0500 Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 17:31:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pierre Muller Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] New file fpc-abi.c Message-ID: <20030217173108.GA19560@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pierre Muller , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <5.0.2.1.2.20030217180426.02227540@ics.u-strasbg.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030217180426.02227540@ics.u-strasbg.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00354.txt.bz2 On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 06:12:17PM +0100, Pierre Muller wrote: > This patch adds a new file fpc-abi.c > to the gdb directory. > > The purpose of this file is rather clear: > it allows to recognize Free Pascal compiled > objects and to handle ABI stuff in a more > adequate way. > > Should I submit this in several RFA? > > > ChangeLog entry: > > 2003-02-17 Pierre Muller > > * fpc-abi.c: New file. > Implements Free Pascal specific ABI. > * minsyms.c (install_minimal_symbols): Recognize > Free Pascal compiled objects by the presence of > 'fpc_compiled' minimal symbol. > * Makefile.in: Add fpc-abi.c compilation rules. A lot of this file looks like it was just copied from one of the GNU C++ ABI files. Certainly the comments are now wrong. Is a lot of the code really appropriate? i.e. does Free Pascal have the concept of an RTTI type, or virtual functions, or operator names? These are listed as C++ ABIs. Adding one for Pascal feels dodgy. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer