From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18690 invoked by alias); 21 Oct 2005 16:39:30 -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 18673 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Oct 2005 16:39:27 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:39:27 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1ESzvD-00015T-2E; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:39:11 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:39:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew STUBBS Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: PATCH: Problem union comparision in TUI Message-ID: <20051021163910.GA4105@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew STUBBS , Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <4353BA69.1030401@st.com> <43561685.3010300@st.com> <20051019200751.GA19037@nevyn.them.org> <43576E68.8080804@st.com> <4357C346.8070400@st.com> <435900C7.2010706@st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <435900C7.2010706@st.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-10/txt/msg00177.txt.bz2 On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 03:52:55PM +0100, Andrew STUBBS wrote: > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >I still think that adding a tag to the union is the cleanest solution. > > I have attached a patch implementing this. I have also attached a > slightly improved version of the one I posted before. > > I am not entirely happy with the tagged union approach. There are a > number of places where it just assumes that the union must be doing the > right thing here. The only other possibility would be to assert. It > does, however, solve the problem at hand. > > Does either of these grab your fancy? Don't we always know what window the compared quantities belong to? Isn't which is in use a static property of the window type? i.e. isn't that a pre-existing "tag" for the union? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC