From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 810 invoked by alias); 2 Mar 2006 04:27:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 800 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Mar 2006 04:27:25 -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; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 04:27:23 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FEfPN-0006lk-8V for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 23:27:21 -0500 Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 04:27:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC]: Document patch for F90 derived type support Message-ID: <20060302042721.GA26005@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060228135310.GA25487@nevyn.them.org> <20060301043203.GA17621@nevyn.them.org> <20060301050501.GA18703@nevyn.them.org> <20060301193829.GD6465@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: 2006-03/txt/msg00040.txt.bz2 On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 06:25:56AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 14:38:29 -0500 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > > > Perhaps I'm confused: isn't "int4" a 32-bit integer? I thought it > > > was, but if I was mistaken, my apologies for the noise. > > > > It's not reserved at all in the input to the compiler - it might be > > something different than a type, or it might be the name of a record > > type (whatever the correct name for that is). > > I'm still not sure I understand, but I think you do agree that this is > a 32-bit integer. In that case, I maintain that we should display > "integer(4)", not "int4". Sorry, I am not expressing myself well. The fact that it is named "int4" in debug output doesn't mean that it is a 32-bit integer. The fact that it is a 32-bit integer, in turn, may mean that we could choose to ignore its name if that was worthwhile. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery