From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29659 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2003 23:02:12 -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 29642 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2003 23:02:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.30.197.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Aug 2003 23:02:12 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C032B7F; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:02:02 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F415AEA.3020500@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:02:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: carlton@kealia.com, msnyder@redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] save space by using enum bitfields References: <200308182207.h7IM7IBM007748@duracef.shout.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00318.txt.bz2 > There are a variety of semi-ugly ways to write this. Andrew C > mentioned that he wanted to re-use the same way that gcc uses. > I like that. Yep. It sux. But at least it's consistent with GCC, and since they've been using it for ages, we're on pretty safe ground. Andrew > Also I would prefer to keep the ": 8" in the structure definition > rather than stick it into the macro. Some of these enum's need > even less space than 8 bits and we might get into some better > packing that way. > > As far as the size goes, I will try my test case with "-readnow" > to suck in all the symbols from the target executable and its > shared libraries (gdb + libc). With the old gdb, this takes > 117280 kilobytes, most of which has to be symbol table related. > > Michael C