From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1138 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2012 17:00:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 1072 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Mar 2012 17:00:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:59:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q2RGxsos003575 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:59:54 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-28.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.28]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q2RGxo9L026097 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:59:53 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:00:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Siddhesh Poyarekar Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow 64-bit enum values Message-ID: <20120327165950.GA1734@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20120220132724.GB4753@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com> <87d397syts.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120229135148.GA32128@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com> <20120301224428.GA30631@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120305063542.GA30196@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com> <20120305080512.GA12311@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120321100630.GA14496@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120321100630.GA14496@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2012-03/txt/msg00913.txt.bz2 On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 11:06:32 +0100, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > I took a separate approach from the one I took in: > > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-02/msg00403.html > > and removed the overloaded meaning of the bitpos location variable to > fix PR symtab/7259. In the following patch, I introduce a separate > field_location union member 'enumval' which can accept LONGEST and > hence expand enum values to 64-bit signed values. With this change, > bitpos now only is used for (non-negative) offsets into structures, > since the other overload of bitpos (range bounds) were already > separated into struct range_bound. Sorry for respoding so late but what is the point of this enum and offsets separation? Both need to become 64bit anyway so why to separate them? Or you find it a better coding style this way? Thanks, Jan