On Wednesday, November 03, 2010 3:22:50 pm Ken Werner wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:31:03 pm Tom Tromey wrote:
> > >>>>> "Ken" == Ken Werner <ken@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> > Ken> Index: gdb/c-valprint.c
> > Ken> ===================================================================
> > Ken> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/c-valprint.c,v
> > Ken> retrieving revision 1.74
> > Ken> diff -p -u -r1.74 c-valprint.c
> > Ken> --- gdb/c-valprint.c	15 Oct 2010 18:54:12 -0000	1.74
> > Ken> +++ gdb/c-valprint.c	19 Oct 2010 12:15:30 -0000
> > Ken> @@ -171,8 +171,13 @@ c_val_print (struct type *type, const gd
> > Ken>        elttype = check_typedef (unresolved_elttype);
> > Ken>        if (TYPE_LENGTH (type) > 0 && TYPE_LENGTH
> > (unresolved_elttype)
> > 
> > > 0) Ken>  	{
> > 
> > Ken> +          LONGEST low_bound, high_bound;
> > Ken> +
> > Ken> +          if (!get_array_bounds(type, &low_bound, &high_bound))
> > 
> > Missing space before open paren.
> 
> Fixed.
> 
> > Ken> +            error (_("Could not determine the array high bound"));
> > Ken> +
> > Ken>  	  eltlen = TYPE_LENGTH (elttype);
> > Ken> -	  len = TYPE_LENGTH (type) / eltlen;
> > Ken> +	  len = high_bound - low_bound + 1;
> > 
> > I guess it is ok to use 'eltlen' elsewhere in the function because it is
> > only the array's overall size which is "weird" -- the element size is
> > still correct.  (Since we don't implement the DWARF stride stuff...)
> 
> Yes, that is also my understanding.
> 
> > The patch is ok with the above nit fixed.
> 
> Thanks. I've checked in the version below:
> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2010-11/msg00014.html

Hi,

The attached patch changes the value_one(), value_complement() and value_neg() 
functions to use get_array_bounds to compute the number of array elements 
instead of dividing the length of the array by the length of the element 
types. It seems that I overlooked these in the first place.

Tested on i686-*-linux-gnu with no regressions.
Ok to apply?

Regards
Ken