From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17843 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2011 17:10:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 17825 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Apr 2011 17:10:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:10:43 +0000 Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p3GH9Lp1000230; Sat, 16 Apr 2011 19:09:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p3GH9KDB010026; Sat, 16 Apr 2011 19:09:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:10:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201104161709.p3GH9KDB010026@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: mjbaars1977.gdb@gmail.com CC: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, dan@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <4DA9C7FE.8020600@gmail.com> (mjbaars1977.gdb@gmail.com) Subject: Re: print_npx_status_word References: <4DA7ED79.3000400@gmail.com> <4DA87235.7060003@gmail.com> <4DA87479.50203@gmail.com> <4DA93270.6030708@gmail.com> <201104160824.p3G8ONWV006175@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <4DA99DA1.2090708@gmail.com> <20110416142809.GA28255@caradoc.them.org> <4DA9C1FC.8040600@gmail.com> <201104161630.p3GGUSsS026236@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <4DA9C7FE.8020600@gmail.com> 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: 2011-04/txt/msg00248.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:46:54 +0200 > From: "Baars, M.J." > > >> When you look at the code in question more closely, you will see that it > >> will present the content of the status word in more detail than the > >> original function, > > Which isn't necessarily a good thing. > > I'll show you the difference in output after the 'info float' command. > > original output: > > Status Word: 0x0000 > TOP: 0 > > new and improved output: > > status word : 0x0000 > exception flags : > stack fault : 0 > error summary status : 0 > busy : 0 > top of stack pointer : 0 > condition code : > > This will give you a much better overview of what is actually happing in > the numeric core, which is eventually what every programmer wants is > what I was always taught. But it will add a lot of extra lines to the output of "info float" such that it doesn't fit on a standard 24-line screen anymore. The current way of printing things is much more concise. And your way of printing things doesn't really add more information; it just uses more words. Admittedly to interpret the printed codes you probably need to have the IA-32 Architecture Software Developer's manual at hand. But to be honest, if you're looking at the FPU at this detailed level you probably already are reading that manual.