From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24906 invoked by alias); 16 Jun 2002 01:28:38 -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 24898 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2002 01:28:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Jun 2002 01:28:36 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E1313C96; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:28:35 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D0BE9C3.90209@cygnus.com> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 18:28:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020613 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Don Howard Cc: Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [Patch] Another small memattr fix. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00288.txt.bz2 >> I can think of three alternatives: >> >> [base, bound) >> [base, bound] >> [base, base+size-1) Try [base, base+(size-1)] (and the paren are important :-) >> >> The first one is what the doco says and has been there for a while so I >> don't think that changing it is a good idea. >> >> Internally, I suspect base+size-1 is the best representation. However, >> for the user interface, is there anything that really says that: >> >> mem 0xfffffff0 0 >> >> is either illegal or poorly defined? > > > > The fact that the first bound is inclusive and the second is exclusive > implies that to me. Also, the current implemntation enforces it. Don, sorry, I'm not sure what you mean here. > How's this: let the parser find the size of the region for us: > > labs (parse_and_evaluate_long (tok1 " - " tok2)); I think it is better to evaluate low/high and then compute the range directly. I wouldn't trust the above expression to always do what you want. > That seems to avoid the max int problem. Then we can use base and size > as the internal representation. No matter what is done I think there will be an edge condition. For instance: [base, base+(size-1)] doesn't work very well when base==0 :-) Andrew