From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17422 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2009 04:52:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 17414 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jan 2009 04:52:22 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-96-233-71-199.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (96.233.71.199) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:51:47 +0000 Received: from ednor.cgf.cx (ednor.casa.cgf.cx [192.168.187.5]) by cgf.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 367E813C028; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:51:37 -0500 (EST) Received: by ednor.cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 2A6F72B385; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:51:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:52:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker Subject: Re: [RFA/windows] cast of address to DWORD warning (handle_unload_dll) Message-ID: <20090114045137.GA5163@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker References: <20090114034202.GF31296@adacore.com> <20090114042345.GA4556@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20090114044615.GA24105@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090114044615.GA24105@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) 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: 2009-01/txt/msg00303.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 08:46:15AM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> >2009-11-14 Joel Brobecker >> > >> > * windows-nat.c (handle_unload_dll): Use host_address to string >> > in order to print the base address of the DLL that was unloaded. >> > >> >This one is hard to test, because it's supposed to never happen. >> >So I tested it by, ahem, visual inspection (I learnt that expression >> >at my first job, where we were producing safety critical software). >> >> I guess this is ok. I just changed other similar occurrences to %p. >> Maybe all of those should also be changed for hobgoblinish consistency >> or this one should be %p too. > >I don't mind changing the patch to using %p at all. The reason I avoided >%p is because I was still in this frame of mind that %p depends on >the implementation - to have consistent output, we have to be careful >to not use %p in the core code. However, I just realized that it's not >necessarily a problem to do so in nat files. > >I did double-check what %p does on Windows, though, and apparently it >does not output the leading 0x (but that's only a detail), but also it >prints the hexa digits in capital letters. This may be from not >being used to seeing addresses printed with capital letters, but >I find it harder to read. On the other hand, I have seen this style >being used in stack dumps printed by Windows, so this may be the >usual style on this OS. Ugh. I didn't know Windows behaved that way. I use Cygwin's implementation internally but I actually don't know what Cygwin does with %p for the rest of the world and my PC is turned off right now. Maybe it does the same thing. I guess that's an argument to change this at some point but for now, it is, of course, ok to check this in. cgf