From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21503 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2002 02:12:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21473 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2002 02:12:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Mar 2002 02:12:16 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C82D63DFD; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 21:10:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3CA12A18.2050009@cygnus.com> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 18:12:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020210 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Berlin Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Let dwarf2 CFI's execute_stack_op be used outside of CFI References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00521.txt.bz2 > On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >> > >> > Errr, not really. >> > What I said is correct. >> > It is parameterized already with a frame and an expression. >> > It's just that we want to hand it a different type of frame. You are mistaken in your assertion below: >> > You implied it wasn't parameterized with either, when it has been since >> > the beginning. > Have you ever considered that you might have just been unclear? Yes. Andrew