From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26800 invoked by alias); 22 Nov 2008 05:12:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 26761 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Nov 2008 05:12:03 -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, 22 Nov 2008 05:11:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EB1D2A9640; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:11:26 -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 fLzuJ-1ENr-e; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:11:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3826F2A9630; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:11:26 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 14478E7ACD; Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:11:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 18:16:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: fix address in call to val_print Message-ID: <20081122051123.GC4318@adacore.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: 2008-11/txt/msg00602.txt.bz2 > 2008-11-20 Paul Pluzhnikov > > * valprint.c (val_print_array_elements): Pass correct > element address to val_print. Sure! It looks pretty clearly correct to me as well. I'm wondering about the testcase. As I understand it, it wouldn't cause any problem with the current FSF version of GDB. But if it's easy to create one, then I think it'd still be a useful test to have, just to make sure it doesn't regress in the future. -- Joel