Re: [RFC/RFA] gdb extension for Harvard architectures

Michael Snyder
2001-11-14T20:24:47Z

Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > OK -- so where do we stand? Are you OK with this patch going in?
> > To be refined later as necessary?
>
> I'm ok with the current set of changes (need to contact David Taylor
> though). The debate is about the semantics of a type cast and that
> depends on this change being present.
>
> While this is happening, can I suggest cleaning things up a little -
> stray +/- blank lines, coding standard and some missing ChangeLog
> entries (TYPE_AS_TYPE?).

After some delay, I'm ready to resubmit this, with clean-ups.
Since it's been so long (and this thread is so long too), I'll
start a new thread.