From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24679 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2002 15:58:39 -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 24664 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2002 15:58:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 2002 15:58:38 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2ED93D6E; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:58:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D62672C.7020308@ges.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:58:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020810 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pierre Muller Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Make cli-out follow gdb_stdout References: <4.2.0.58.20020819163726.00a46ff0@ics.u-strasbg.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00588.txt.bz2 > This mail is followed by several others in which Andrew and Daniel argue about > the proposed patch... > > Andrew says > >>So the assertion: > >> > >> global uiout->stream->ui_file == global gdb_stdout > >> > >>doesn't hold :-( > > But I think there is a confusion at that point > (at least after reading of the thread, I was not really sure that > it was clear). > My impression is that the current way the cli_out_new works is not correct > because if you change gdb_stdout, this change is not reflected in > the uiout global var. Thus the above assertion > does not hold in the current old code, but if I understood Daneil's patch correctly > that patch should have solved that issue. This is sitting in my in-tray. Yes, the assertion doesn't hold. > Thus I am very disappointed by the final outcome of this thread... > I really tought that Daniel's idea was the way to go, > as uiout is not known in all source files, but gdb_stdout is. > > Also, I didn't understand the intent of Andrew concerning this issue. > Andrew, could you try to reformulate your point of view? There is always a tradeoff between allowing an immediate ``quick fix'' and seeking a better medium to long term solution. cf: /* Keep structure return address in this variable. FIXME: This is a horrid kludge which should not be allowed to continue living. This only allows a single nested call to a structure-returning function. Come on, guys! -- gnu@cygnus.com, Aug 92 */ static CORE_ADDR rs6000_struct_return_address; One immediate thing to fix would be catch_exceptions() which is breaking its contract -- it at least should keep the uiout and uifile in sync. I think, if that is fixed, then I think it will be possible to fix the problems you've encountered. enjoy, Andrew