Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: "Pierre Muller" <pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix display of array of unspecified length inside structures
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:38:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201102181524.45999.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <00c301cbcf7b$afaa6d20$0eff4760$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr>

On Friday 18 February 2011 14:54:03, Pierre Muller wrote:

> > On Friday 18 February 2011 11:08:38, Pierre Muller wrote:
> > 
> > > PS: It could be wise to add some test in the testsuite for
> > > this, but I have no idea where I could insert this kind of test,
> > > any ideas?
> > 
> > Yes, please.  We have surprisingly few tests for this sort of
> > thing, AFAICS.  I'm not even sure this is a regression from
> > my recent changes, I think it may well not be.
> 
>   I checked out gdb version 7.2 shows this regression,
> as compared to Cygwin 6.8 at least...
> Which means that the regression is not really recent.
> 
>   This might means that we should also merge this patch to
> the branch, no?

Sound fine to me.

>  
> > Zero-length arrays (as poor man's flexible arrays) are supported
> > in GNU C as an extension.  To be portable, you'd
> > need to use an array of length 1 (or c99's real flexible arrays),
> > but that won't trigger the bug.
>   Apparently there is also the flexible array member construct
> see
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.1.2/gcc/Zero-Length.html

That just confirms what I said.  :-)  The flexible array
member construst is C99 only, so it's likely that other
compilers choke on it by default.

> > I'd point at printcmds.exp, but I'm not sure if there are compilers
> > out there that choke on the construct...  There's always a
> > new test file option...
> > 
> > > PS2: It is probably impossible to make such a test without
> > > alloca or some other memory allocation function, no?
> > > Are there any system restriction for this?
> 
>   There is a long check at start of gdb.base/funcargs.c
> but it might just be to really check that alloca really uses
> the stack...

Irk.  Just use malloc then?  It's not really crutial that
the test runs on all targets/hosts.  As long as it runs
on the targets must people are developing on (GNU/Linux,Windows),
it's fine, we're reasonably well covered.

-- 
Pedro Alves


  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-18 15:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-18 11:34 Pierre Muller
2011-02-18 11:59 ` Pedro Alves
2011-02-18 15:01   ` Pierre Muller
2011-02-18 15:38     ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2011-02-18 17:39       ` Pierre Muller
2011-02-18 17:41         ` Pedro Alves

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201102181524.45999.pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox