From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20431 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2008 22:00:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 20412 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Sep 2008 22:00:27 -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; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 21:59:49 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CBA698417; Tue, 2 Sep 2008 21:59:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B55981E8; Tue, 2 Sep 2008 21:59:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Kaduc-0006oD-Hz; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:59:46 -0400 Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:00:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc][23/37] Eliminate builtin_type_ macros: Platform-neutral types for internal variables Message-ID: <20080902215946.GC25623@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20080902124302.GC21700@caradoc.them.org> <200809022154.m82LsF4v015969@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200809022154.m82LsF4v015969@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-09/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 11:54:15PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > I guess that would mean current_gdbarch for now. However, I had been > wondering what that means for the multi-architecture case -- if you > set $_ in one frame, and then switch to a frame using a different > architecture and use $_ as inferior call argument there, we'll still > get pointers the architecture doesn't understand ... Yes indeed. But this problem's not specific to $_; you could get it by calling a function from the other architecture or using a variable from the history. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery