Re: [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>]

> On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 18:42:47 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> said:
> 
> 
>>> +      /* NOTE: carlton/2002-08-22: Previously, the second argument to
>>> +	 smash_to_method_type was die->type rather than type, and the
>>> +	 type argument to dwarf2_add_member_fn didn't exst.  This is
>>> +	 incorrect: the second argument to smash_to_method_type should
>>> +	 be the type of the class that this is a method of, whereas
>>> +	 die->type is the type of the method itself.  So we need to
>>> +	 pass that type in from read_structure_scope explicitly.  See
>>> +	 PR gdb/653.  */
> 
> 
>> I'd rather a comment like:
>> 	/* TYPE is the domain of this method, and DIE->TYPE is the type
>> 	   of the method itself (TYPE_CODE_METHOD).  */
> 
> 
>> There's no point in cluttering up the code with history of this sort
>> unless you have low confidence in the change's effect on some odd
>> corner-case.  That's just my personal judgement, though.
> 
> 
> I agree.  I'd originally put in the excessively verbose comment
> because Andrew complained about my putting too much information in the
> ChangeLog instead of a comment, but I think that your version of the
> comment is better.
> 
> 
>> If you agree, mind committing it with that or a similar change?
> 
> 
> Great, will do (unless Andrew complains about the new version of the
> comment).

Doesn't worry me.

Andrew