From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19531 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2009 02:54:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 19521 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Apr 2009 02:54:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Apr 2009 02:54:05 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242CE101AB; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 02:54:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04E631018C; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 02:54:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LqeyH-0007n3-CS; Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:54:01 -0400 Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 02:54:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jonas Maebe Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Borland fastcall support (i386) Message-ID: <20090406025401.GA29656@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jonas Maebe , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <390385D8-5B6E-4844-8940-4002C012140F@elis.ugent.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <390385D8-5B6E-4844-8940-4002C012140F@elis.ugent.be> 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00100.txt.bz2 On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 11:28:57PM +0200, Jonas Maebe wrote: > I've continued working on gdb to also support calling Pascal methods, and > I've run a bit into a hitch: the calling_convention field is part of a > union that also contains cplus_stuff (inside main_type in gdbtypes.h), and > I need both for methods using a non-standard calling convention. Is there > a problem with moving the calling_convention field out of the > type_specific union, and if not, is there anything I should pay particular > attention to? (other than adjusting a couple of macros) Why is cplus_stuff used in this case? /* CPLUS_STUFF is for TYPE_CODE_STRUCT. It is initialized to point to cplus_struct_default, a default static instance of a struct cplus_struct_type. */ struct cplus_struct_type *cplus_stuff; Methods don't have base classes, methods of their own, or so forth. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery