[RFC]: remove inconsistency in printcmd.c: print_scalar_formatted

[Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1790 bytes --]

There's some code in print_scalar_formatted() I would like to remove.  
It tests if the sizeof the type of the value being printed is greater 
than the sizeof of LONGEST and if so, it may attempt to use 
extract_unsigned_integer().  If that fails, it prints out the value in hex.

There a number of problems with this.  First and foremost is the fact 
that it is comparing the sizeof with the host's LONGEST type, not the 
target.  The second problem is that extract_unsigned_integer() does the 
same size test and returns failure so the call is pointless.  The third 
problem is that this code creates an inconsistency in how doubles/floats 
are treated in comparison to long double.   All  three of these types 
are capable of storing a value greater than  that which can be contained 
in a LONGEST.  At present, floats and possibly doubles will pass the 
size test and end up calling unpack_long().   True long double doesn't 
pass the test and ends up printing in hex.  This problem causes a number 
of new errors on ia64 with the latest changes to structs.exp.  The new 
testcase uses p/c to print out various types and is not ready for the 
hex version of the long double value being printed out.

To remedy the problem, I have removed the code.  I don't think it is 
particularly helpful.  I think if the user asks for an integral format, 
then they should be prepared to take what that choice entails when 
printing a float input. 

With this change, the new failures for the ia64 testsuite go away (no 
regressions).

Comments?

-- Jeff J.

2003-12-12  Jeff Johnston  <jjohnstn@redhat.com>

        * printcmd.c (print_scalar_formatted): Do not check for sizeof
        type being greater than sizeof of host's LONGEST.  Always use
        unpack_long() unless format 'f' chosen.


[-- Attachment #2: printcmd.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1712 bytes --]

Index: printcmd.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/printcmd.c,v
retrieving revision 1.69
diff -u -p -r1.69 printcmd.c
--- printcmd.c	21 Sep 2003 01:26:45 -0000	1.69
+++ printcmd.c	12 Dec 2003 20:16:16 -0000
@@ -346,44 +346,7 @@ print_scalar_formatted (void *valaddr, s
   LONGEST val_long;
   unsigned int len = TYPE_LENGTH (type);
 
-  if (len > sizeof (LONGEST)
-      && (format == 't'
-	  || format == 'c'
-	  || format == 'o'
-	  || format == 'u'
-	  || format == 'd'
-	  || format == 'x'))
-    {
-      if (!TYPE_UNSIGNED (type)
-	  || !extract_long_unsigned_integer (valaddr, len, &val_long))
-	{
-	  /* We can't print it normally, but we can print it in hex.
-	     Printing it in the wrong radix is more useful than saying
-	     "use /x, you dummy".  */
-	  /* FIXME:  we could also do octal or binary if that was the
-	     desired format.  */
-	  /* FIXME:  we should be using the size field to give us a
-	     minimum field width to print.  */
-
-	  if (format == 'o')
-	    print_octal_chars (stream, valaddr, len);
-	  else if (format == 'd')
-	    print_decimal_chars (stream, valaddr, len);
-	  else if (format == 't')
-	    print_binary_chars (stream, valaddr, len);
-	  else
-	    /* replace with call to print_hex_chars? Looks
-	       like val_print_type_code_int is redoing
-	       work.  - edie */
-
-	    val_print_type_code_int (type, valaddr, stream);
-
-	  return;
-	}
-
-      /* If we get here, extract_long_unsigned_integer set val_long.  */
-    }
-  else if (format != 'f')
+  if (format != 'f')
     val_long = unpack_long (type, valaddr);
 
   /* If the value is a pointer, and pointers and addresses are not the