From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31471 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2007 20:12:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 31462 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jun 2007 20:12:11 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jun 2007 20:12:08 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1C3E9829C; Wed, 27 Jun 2007 20:12:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C879817B; Wed, 27 Jun 2007 20:12:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I3drS-00028p-Ub; Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:11:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:10:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Markus Deuling , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, uweigand@de.ibm.com Subject: Re: [rfc] Replace macros by gdbarch functions in gdbint manual Message-ID: <20070627201134.GA8087@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Markus Deuling , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, uweigand@de.ibm.com References: <4678FEBE.7040209@de.ibm.com> <467B7557.9000708@de.ibm.com> <4681382D.1070708@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-06/txt/msg00484.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 09:30:19PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > +the inferior function onto the stack. In addition to pushing @var{nargs}, the > > +code should push @var{struct_addr} (when @var{struct_return}), and the return > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > It looks like something is missing in the parens. The old text also > had this problem; can someone suggest or guess what was meant here? It's unclear wording, but I understand it; struct_return is essentially a boolean condition here. And there's a flag variable of the same name in call_function_by_hand. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery