From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14754 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2003 22:43:55 -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 14380 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2003 22:42:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 6 Jan 2003 22:42:39 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 072313D45; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 17:42:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E1A0655.2050009@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 22:43:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021211 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: Slay COERCE_FLOAT_TO_DOUBLE References: <20021223203031.GA18990@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00238.txt.bz2 > Stabs compilers (I only checked GCC and Sun Workshop CC, but those are the > two major ones) emit the call-as type in the debug information. I.E. an > unprototyped function taking a float argument will have a type signature > that says it takes a double. So the easy thing to do for stabs is to set > TYPE_FLAG_PROTOTYPED always, with appropriate commentary. I've done this. > It caused a minor bit of testsuite churn, since some ()'s became (void)'s; I > think that's OK, we know they are really void functions anyway. Can you expand a bit here. When exactly do the () become (void)? Looking at the changes to stabs, mdebug and hpread it appears to reverse the default for all non dwarf* cases - assume prototyped rather than un-prototyped? That's a pretty radical change and needs to be clearly spelt out in at least the NEWS file. (Like many people I'm back from a break and am only just getting to these e-mails. This is probably why there were few responses earlier.) Andrew