From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3346 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 2008 14:00:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 3317 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Sep 2008 14:00:27 -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; Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:59:45 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C8522A96CB; Sat, 6 Sep 2008 09:59:43 -0400 (EDT) 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 QVzrrCh8xH-c; Sat, 6 Sep 2008 09:59:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CAA92A96AA; Sat, 6 Sep 2008 09:59:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0CD7CE7ACD; Sat, 6 Sep 2008 15:59:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:00:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: uweigand@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc][21/37] Eliminate builtin_type_ macros: Platform-neutral builtin_type_void Message-ID: <20080906135940.GQ15267@adacore.com> References: <20080831175045.128504000@de.ibm.com> <20080831175130.615909000@de.ibm.com> <20080906003724.GK15267@adacore.com> <20080906041154.GA10692@caradoc.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080906041154.GA10692@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: 2008-09/txt/msg00125.txt.bz2 > > I don't want to add a field in our type structure to mark the types > > that are architecture-specific, since that would have a noticeable > > memory cost just for a few specific types. > > No, it wouldn't. We have tons of free flag bits; it sounds like the > right thing to do would be to mark only the global types.> Duh!!! Of course... -- Joel