Re: patch for printing 64-bit values in i386 registers; STABS format

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>]

>> It's possible to fix this without adding an architecture method, or 
>> implementing location expressions (the penny just dropped).  The basic 
>> problem is the same as for the MIPS - need a custom register area.  Hence:
>> 
>> - define a sequence of nameless cooked ([NUM_REGS .. 
>> NUM_REGS+NUM_PSEUDO_REGS) range) registers ordered the way stabs would 
>> like them
>> - modify the existing stabs_regnum_to_regnum to map the messed up 
>> registers onto those values
> 
> 
> Could you explain why you think that (which I personally think is much
> grosser, since it perpuates the assumption that values continue into
> sequential registers) is a better solution than Mark's approach?

The assumption that values continue into sequential registers is, 
unfortunatly. how stabs works :-(

The consequence of `without adding an architecture method' is that it 
confinds the i386 case to the i386.  The MIPS case, which is far worse, 
will also be the same (at present there is a slew of per-architecture 
methods that can be eliminated when the MIPS switches to the same strategy).

Andrew