From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20234 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2008 16:14:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 20225 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2008 16:14:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:13:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA1A2A96B3 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:13:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 1N+McrI+R9fE for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:13:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE54C2A96B1 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:13:49 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 75DE1E7ACB; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 08:13:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:14:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Need post-processing of parameters for function calls in Ada Message-ID: <20080108161337.GD11650@adacore.com> References: <20080108143622.GG24614@adacore.com> <20080108150114.GA19378@caradoc.them.org> <20080108152900.GB11650@adacore.com> <20080108153648.GA21928@caradoc.them.org> <20080108154941.GC11650@adacore.com> <20080108155647.GA23394@caradoc.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080108155647.GA23394@caradoc.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i 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: 2008-01/txt/msg00139.txt.bz2 > > Should I proceed with my proposal? > > I would prefer to put the call inside the existing value_arg_coerce, > at least to start with. Do you mean: dropping the new language field, and just add a call to the Ada coerce routine inside value_arg_coerce (or in other words, more the change I first proposed inside value_arg_coerce)? That's a much smaller change, and I'm OK with that! -- Joel