From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27499 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2002 16:07:01 -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 27467 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2002 16:06:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Oct 2002 16:06:59 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (toocool.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.72]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC25800084; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 12:06:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3DB577A3.8B2BE42C@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 09:07:00 -0000 From: "J. Johnston" Organization: Red Hat Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Elena Zannoni Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: revised changes for gdb/mi 792 References: <3DAC86CB.5CE60DE5@redhat.com> <15797.29212.712389.191319@localhost.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00403.txt.bz2 Elena Zannoni wrote: > > J. Johnston writes: > > Keith has pointed out some scenarios my original patch did not address and supplied > > an alternate solution such that I have modified my patch. This replaces the former > > patch that was posted. > > > > > > Has this been committed? > In any event, could the STREQ that you touched be replaced by strcmp()? > I have not applied any patches unless they were approved. This patch has not been committed. Yes, I can change the STREQs in the new code to be strcmp. -- Jeff J. > Thanks > Elena > > > gdb/ChangeLog: > > > > 2002-10-15 Jeff Johnston > > Keith Seitz > > > > * varobj.c (cplus_name_of_child): Change code to handle the fact that > > fields are not necessarily contiguous with regards to their access control. > > This is a fix for PR gdb/792. > > > > Ok to commit? > > > > -- Jeff J.--- varobj.0.c Fri Oct 11 15:46:03 2002 > > +++ varobj.c Tue Oct 15 17:00:14 2002 > > @@ -2176,7 +2176,6 @@ > > { > > char *name; > > struct type *type; > > - int children[3]; > > > > if (CPLUS_FAKE_CHILD (parent)) > > { > > @@ -2191,55 +2190,97 @@ > > { > > case TYPE_CODE_STRUCT: > > case TYPE_CODE_UNION: > > - cplus_class_num_children (type, children); > > - > > if (CPLUS_FAKE_CHILD (parent)) > > { > > - int i; > > - > > - /* Skip over vptr, if it exists. */ > > - if (TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE (type) == type > > - && index >= TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO (type)) > > - index++; > > - > > - /* FIXME: This assumes that type orders > > - inherited, public, private, protected */ > > - i = index + TYPE_N_BASECLASSES (type); > > - if (STREQ (parent->name, "private") > > - || STREQ (parent->name, "protected")) > > - i += children[v_public]; > > - if (STREQ (parent->name, "protected")) > > - i += children[v_private]; > > + /* The fields of the class type are ordered as they > > + appear in the class. We are given an index for a > > + particular access control type ("public","protected", > > + or "private"). We must skip over fields that don't > > + have the access control we are looking for to properly > > + find the indexed field. */ > > + int type_index = TYPE_N_BASECLASSES (type); > > + if (STREQ (parent->name, "private")) > > + { > > + while (index >= 0) > > + { > > + if (TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE (type) == type > > + && type_index == TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO (type)) > > + ; /* ignore vptr */ > > + else if (TYPE_FIELD_PRIVATE (type, type_index)) > > + --index; > > + ++type_index; > > + } > > + --type_index; > > + } > > + else if (STREQ (parent->name, "protected")) > > + { > > + while (index >= 0) > > + { > > + if (TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE (type) == type > > + && type_index == TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO (type)) > > + ; /* ignore vptr */ > > + else if (TYPE_FIELD_PROTECTED (type, type_index)) > > + --index; > > + ++type_index; > > + } > > + --type_index; > > + } > > + else > > + { > > + while (index >= 0) > > + { > > + if (TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE (type) == type > > + && type_index == TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO (type)) > > + ; /* ignore vptr */ > > + else if (!TYPE_FIELD_PRIVATE (type, type_index) && > > + !TYPE_FIELD_PROTECTED (type, type_index)) > > + --index; > > + ++type_index; > > + } > > + --type_index; > > + } > > > > - name = TYPE_FIELD_NAME (type, i); > > + name = TYPE_FIELD_NAME (type, type_index); > > } > > else if (index < TYPE_N_BASECLASSES (type)) > > + /* We are looking up the name of a base class */ > > name = TYPE_FIELD_NAME (type, index); > > else > > { > > + int children[3]; > > + cplus_class_num_children(type, children); > > + > > /* Everything beyond the baseclasses can > > - only be "public", "private", or "protected" */ > > + only be "public", "private", or "protected" > > + > > + The special "fake" children are always output by varobj in > > + this order. So if INDEX == 2, it MUST be "protected". */ > > index -= TYPE_N_BASECLASSES (type); > > switch (index) > > { > > case 0: > > - if (children[v_public] != 0) > > - { > > - name = "public"; > > - break; > > - } > > + if (children[v_public] > 0) > > + name = "public"; > > + else if (children[v_private] > 0) > > + name = "private"; > > + else > > + name = "protected"; > > + break; > > case 1: > > - if (children[v_private] != 0) > > + if (children[v_public] > 0) > > { > > - name = "private"; > > - break; > > + if (children[v_private] > 0) > > + name = "private"; > > + else > > + name = "protected"; > > } > > + else if (children[v_private] > 0) > > + name = "protected"; > > + break; > > case 2: > > - if (children[v_protected] != 0) > > - { > > - name = "protected"; > > - break; > > - } > > + /* Must be protected */ > > + name = "protected"; > > + break; > > default: > > /* error! */ > > break;