From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23655 invoked by alias); 5 Jan 2004 02:32:17 -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 23568 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2004 02:32:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO granger.mail.mindspring.net) (207.69.200.148) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Jan 2004 02:32:17 -0000 Received: from user-119a90a.biz.mindspring.com ([66.149.36.10] helo=berman.michael-chastain.com) by granger.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AdKWw-0006pa-00; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:31:46 -0500 Received: by berman.michael-chastain.com (Postfix, from userid 502) id 112BF4B35A; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:32:00 -0500 (EST) To: drow@mvista.com, mec.gnu@mindspring.com Subject: Re: [rfc/cp] method stub assertions Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Message-Id: <20040105023200.112BF4B35A@berman.michael-chastain.com> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 02:32:00 -0000 From: mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain) X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00082.txt.bz2 > ! struct type *basetype = > ! basetype = TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (VALUE_TYPE (arg2)); Argh! But the compilers didn't error out. I wonder if that is legal Ansi C? I'll re-do the patch. Michael C