From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28048 invoked by alias); 20 Mar 2005 02:33:10 -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 28005 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2005 02:33:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 20 Mar 2005 02:33:07 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.44 #1 (Debian)) id 1DCqFX-0003GV-BU; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:33:07 -0500 Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 02:33:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: Add 'double' member to 64-bit vector register type Message-ID: <20050320023307.GA12519@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20050319153709.GA4659@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00257.txt.bz2 On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 04:13:12PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote: > Well, that brings up the other thought --- since the set of types > useful to include in a vector register really depends on the > architecture, wouldn't it be better to just export the convenience > functions for constructing these types from gdbtypes.c and then let > architectures build ones that actually suit their needs? My inclination is "yes". Anybody else? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC