From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26945 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2006 01:39:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 26937 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Feb 2006 01:39:32 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 01:39:31 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1F7NFv-0002C7-Of; Thu, 09 Feb 2006 20:39:27 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 01:39:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: fixes for type-punning warnings in GCC 4.1 Message-ID: <20060210013927.GA8310@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Alexandre Oliva , Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20051219221830.GA32448@nevyn.them.org> <20060122203323.GC27224@nevyn.them.org> <20060208045905.GA12327@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00231.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 10:32:48PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Feb 8, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 12:48:11AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > >> On Jan 22, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >> > >> > The output is always a DOUBLEST. I don't know of any reason why we > >> > should enable HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE if we can't printf and scanf them; would > >> > this be simpler in that case? Don't make DOUBLEST something we can't > >> > scan or print. > >> > >> Sounds good to me. Ok to install? > > > Well, it's not right as-is; you need to look at the other uses of > > HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE. > > Did. The other uses of HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE are correct, since they do > not assume DOUBLEST is long double and they make no attempts at > printing long doubles directly. Disagree; did you read the bit of my message that you snipped? doublest.c jumps through unnecessary hoops casting to long double and back to handle a DOUBLEST if this is defined. > > Would you mind terribly fixing that, adding a changelog, and leaving > > out the tui-data change for now? > > gdb won't build without the tui-data change. What's wrong with adding > the temporary fix now, such that it builds, until someone with a > better understanding can go ahead and re-engineer the data structure > correctly? Sorry, use -Wno-error if you're in that much of a hurry. I even offered to take care of it for you. If your fix goes in, it will never leave; we have plenty of experience with FIXMEs in GDB to back that up, I think. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery