From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12427 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2010 17:41:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 12419 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Mar 2010 17:41:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:41:25 +0000 Received: (qmail 23619 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2010 17:41:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 30 Mar 2010 17:41:23 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Stan Shebs Subject: Re: [PATCH] Whack some dead code Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:41:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.31-20-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <4BB144E7.1080800@codesourcery.com> <201003301203.22533.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4BB22F4A.1030506@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <4BB22F4A.1030506@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201003301841.21510.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2010-03/txt/msg01072.txt.bz2 On Tuesday 30 March 2010 18:05:14, Stan Shebs wrote: > A better term is maybe "bogus code", and my explanation is misleading. > If you look at the locals start_pc and end_pc, you see that the original > code's sal.symtab == 0 case does not set them before they get passed to > tfind_1 at the bottom. I suppose one could try to salvage the sal.pc != > 0 case and treat it as a start_pc == end_pc situation; we'd would want > to think how each case is supposed to be useful. Whoops, yeah, there was a bug here. The intention was certainly for treating sal.pc != 0 case as start_pc == end_pc. I don't know how useful that would be. The " for address 0x....... " part did looks a bit useful, but I won't cry over it being gone. > It would be a little > annoying if a typo in tfind takes you to an unexpected trace frame, > which in turn could disable your display commands, etc. Well, there was an obvious bug. That remark applies to all bugs. :-) > (Incidentally, I notice that "help info line" doesn't mention the raw > address option. Didn't it used to??) (Hmm. I've tried gdb 5.3 (2002), and it doesn't, the help text looks the same. Don't have older builds handy.) -- Pedro Alves