From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23952 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2004 22:32:44 -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 23836 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2004 22:32:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.129.200.20) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Mar 2004 22:32:13 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 670332B92; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:32:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <404E45EC.4030205@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:09:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, vinschen@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] gdb.cp/classes.exp: Don't try to print local variable out of scope References: <20040309161507.9FBF54B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> <404E2B2C.8030201@gnu.org> <20040309212736.GA8404@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20040309212736.GA8404@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00215.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20040319000900.b-GznIDWA8G9OOptyJd3f7KQ8wPSYbYRnM5taUBgeY0@z> >>Yes, the inner "i" should be in scope. That line, which hasn't yet been >>> executed, will destory the inner block. I think that is covered by the >>> GCC-O0 rule? > > > If that's right, it sounds like we should be using the address-in-block > hack to figure out what local variables are in scope for the top > frame. But that runs the risk of, for instance, moving us back into a > preceeding function. Er, that sounds like a theoretical address-in-block bug? The value returned should be floored by (as in can't be less than) the function start. Can you think of an edge case that makes this real? Andrew