From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24356 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2005 20:30:46 -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 24332 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Oct 2005 20:30:43 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:30:43 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1EOhof-00026T-DK; Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:30:41 -0400 Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: Relax checking of garbage struct return values Message-ID: <20051009203041.GF7107@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-10/txt/msg00081.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:44:29AM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote: > > The comments are supposed to have the story. Tested on > x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. > > 2005-10-05 Jim Blandy > > * gdb.base/structs.exp (any): New function. > (test_struct_returns): Don't make any assumptions at all about > what value the function returns when GDB can't set the return > value. Yeah, I agree with your comments. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC