From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12559 invoked by alias); 20 May 2012 20:24:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 12550 invoked by uid 22791); 20 May 2012 20:24:46 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,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; Sun, 20 May 2012 20:24:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4KKOQGO028816 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 20 May 2012 16:24:26 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-17.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.17]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4KKOMVw017086 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 20 May 2012 16:24:24 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 20:24:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Doug Evans Cc: Siddhesh Poyarekar , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Expand bitpos and type.length to LONGEST and ULONGEST Message-ID: <20120520202421.GA17516@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20120220132724.GB4753@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com> <20120221210235.GA26897@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120504183858.67d416b7@spoyarek> <20120515200454.GA11338@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120516092012.4acba735@spoyarek> <20120516071911.GA31894@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120516131151.049251cc@spoyarek> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00749.txt.bz2 On Sun, 20 May 2012 17:42:56 +0200, Doug Evans wrote: > Since it's now ok to use int64_t,uint64_t (right?) I wonder if we > should move away from LONGEST,ULONGEST. > [I remember a port Cygnus once did where long long was 128 bits. 1/2 :-)] I agree. Although if for example Siddhesh has the patch already mostly ready with LONGEST/ULONGEST I do not think it needs to be reworked, do you? Thanks, Jan