From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9818 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2014 15:40:57 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 9802 invoked by uid 89); 4 Nov 2014 15:40:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: e39.co.us.ibm.com Received: from e39.co.us.ibm.com (HELO e39.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.160) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 15:40:55 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e39.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 08:40:53 -0700 Received: from d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.202.177) by e39.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.139) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 08:40:52 -0700 Received: from b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.17]) by d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 416761FF0043 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 08:29:37 -0700 (MST) Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id sA4Feq8053018662 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 16:40:52 +0100 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id sA4Feprt003721 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 08:40:52 -0700 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with SMTP id sA4FelI2003440; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 08:40:48 -0700 Message-Id: <201411041540.sA4FelI2003440@d03av02.boulder.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 04 Nov 2014 16:40:47 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] Make chained function calls in expressions work To: sivachandra@google.com (Siva Chandra) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 15:40:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org (gdb-patches) In-Reply-To: from "Siva Chandra" at Nov 04, 2014 07:23:33 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14110415-0033-0000-0000-000002913EDC X-SW-Source: 2014-11/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2 Siva Chandra wrote: > On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > Siva Chandra wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > >> > Yes, having an additional flag in struct expression would fix the safety > >> > issue. Moving initialization to evalute_subexp if *pos == 0 would then > >> > no longer be safety issue, but simply enabling use of temporaries in more > >> > cases. > >> > >> Since I have my code already setup in this fashion, I would prefer to > >> go this route unless you see an advantage of going with the solution > >> you suggest below. > > > > Well, I don't think there are any functional advantages as such, but the > > implementation looks a bit cleaner (all the details of temporary handling > > done in infcall.c; fewer interactions between eval.c and infcall.c; > > shorter patch overall). > > Shall I go with the thread route then? Yes, please. Sorry for asking for extra work, but I think overall this will be the better implementation. Thanks, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com