From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25968 invoked by alias); 19 Aug 2003 19:42:16 -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 25957 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2003 19:42:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO concert.shout.net) (204.253.184.25) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2003 19:42:15 -0000 Received: from duracef.shout.net (duracef.shout.net [204.253.184.12]) by concert.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7JJgDUg014875; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:42:13 -0500 Received: from duracef.shout.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7JJgDHK023615; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:42:13 -0500 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7JJgDZO023614; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 15:42:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 19:42:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200308191942.h7JJgDZO023614@duracef.shout.net> To: ezannoni@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com, mec@shout.net Subject: Re: [rfa] save space by using enum bitfields Cc: ac131313@redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00325.txt.bz2 For people tracking patches: This patch is withdrawn for rework. It was drawing a gcc warning about an enum definition nested in a struct definition. Seems like this is fine: struct s { enum e { one, two, three } e1; }; But this is not: struct s { enum e { one, two, three }; enum e e1; }; So I gotta refactor: enum e { one, two, three }; struct s { enum e e1; }; Michael C === 2003-08-17 Michael Chastain * defs.h (ENUM_BITFIELD): New macro. * symtab.h (ENUM_BITFIELD): Use it. (BYTE_BITFIELD): Remove old macro, which was already disabled.