From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5868 invoked by alias); 7 Feb 2008 22:54:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 5859 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Feb 2008 22:54:37 -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; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:54:11 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327D498300; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 22:54:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 148B89829D; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 22:54:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JNFdA-00080j-2W; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:54:08 -0500 Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:54:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA/commit(Ada)] SEGV during symbol completion - VEC usage issue Message-ID: <20080207225408.GA30696@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20080207222459.GF3907@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080207222459.GF3907@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) 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: 2008-02/txt/msg00140.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 02:24:59PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote: > So I fixed the problem by turning parameter SV into a VEC**. > > 2008-02-07 Joel Brobecker > > * ada-lang.c (symbol_completion_add): Make SV parameter a VEC** > instead of just a VEC*. Update use of SV. > (ada_make_symbol_completion_list): Update symbol_completion_add calls. > > Tested on x86-linux, no regression. I'll commit now because it cures a SEGV > that is easy to hit, but I'd appreciate a second pair of eyes... Looks correct to me also. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery