From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22308 invoked by alias); 23 Apr 2003 02:06:20 -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 22301 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2003 02:06:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Apr 2003 02:06:20 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3N26KD20502 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:06:20 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3N26JW01021; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:06:19 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3N26IM08386; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 19:06:18 -0700 Message-ID: <3EA5F51A.8CC11F12@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 02:06:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adam Fedor CC: GDB Patches Subject: Re: [RFC] Trivialize objc-lang.c FETCH_ARGUMENT References: <5D31A204-752F-11D7-A2CD-000A277AC1A4@doc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00426.txt.bz2 Adam Fedor wrote: > > On Tuesday, April 22, 2003, at 07:41 PM, Michael Snyder wrote: > > > Adam Fedor wrote: > >> > >> Well, I thought I'd at least try to see if this patch would be ok. > >> Here > >> I replace the arcitecture dependant FETCH_ARGUMENT with a trivial > >> implementation that does nothing. This would allow objc-lang.o to be > >> linked into gdb and I commit most or all of the remaining Objective-C > >> patches. Then I could work on fixing FETCH_ARGUMENT at my leasure... > > > > That seems reasonable. By the way, if there's been an ongoing > > discussion, > > I haven't followed it. Why is it that you need to do this in an > > architecture-dependent way? GDB should have enough debug info to > > do this cleanly, shouldn't it? > > > It's possible, although these particular functions are in the Apple > runtime and highly optimized, possibly in assembly. I'm not sure if the > information is available. I'll have to look at it more, but I couldn't > even test the changes since it only works on MacOSX/Darwin and GNU gdb > doesn't compile on Darwin. Yeah, if I remember from my days at NeXT, the purpose of this was in debugging something that was not really debuggable. So some sort of compromise would seem to be in order. If this function does not need to be general (it doesn't seem to be used anywhere else), perhaps the apple folk can agree to some sort of a specified API for obtaining the arguments they need. Or perhaps they no longer need such radical optimization, and the functions can be written in C.