From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24262 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2015 18:06:01 -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 24244 invoked by uid 89); 14 Aug 2015 18:06:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:06:00 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5292D292FF; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:05:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 2PWDWDPluaYi; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:05:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C4F2291FA; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:05:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6E38144454; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 11:05:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:06:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Cc: Keith Seitz Subject: Re: New ARI warning Wed Aug 12 01:53:55 UTC 2015 Message-ID: <20150814180556.GN22245@adacore.com> References: <20150812015355.GA61373@sourceware.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150812015355.GA61373@sourceware.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg00386.txt.bz2 > 295a296,301 > > gdb/location.c:39: regression: PTR: Do not use PTR, ISO C 90 implies 'void *' > gdb/location.c:39:#define EL_TYPE(PTR) (PTR)->type > > gdb/location.c:47: regression: PTR: Do not use PTR, ISO C 90 implies 'void *' > gdb/location.c:47:#define EL_LINESPEC(PTR) ((PTR)->u.addr_string) > > gdb/location.c:48: regression: PTR: Do not use PTR, ISO C 90 implies 'void *' > gdb/location.c:48:#define EL_PROBE(PTR) ((PTR)->u.addr_string) > > gdb/location.c:52: regression: PTR: Do not use PTR, ISO C 90 implies 'void *' > gdb/location.c:52:#define EL_ADDRESS(PTR) (PTR)->u.address > > gdb/location.c:56: regression: PTR: Do not use PTR, ISO C 90 implies 'void *' > gdb/location.c:56:#define EL_EXPLICIT(PTR) (&((PTR)->u.explicit)) > > gdb/location.c:62: regression: PTR: Do not use PTR, ISO C 90 implies 'void *' > gdb/location.c:62:#define EL_STRING(PTR) ((PTR)->as_string) I'm wondering what other people think of these. On the one hand, I'm pretty sure the ARI check is too simplistic and N/A for this code. On the other hand, I'd like to think that our long term goal/hope is to have a clean ARI report someday. We could tell the ARI that these are OK by adding explicit ARI: markers, but it seems to me that it'd be just as simple to change the name of the parameter for each macro. Thoughts? -- Joel