From: Andrew STUBBS <andrew.stubbs@st.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: PATCH: Problem union comparision in TUI
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43576E68.8080804@st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <usluwd1ew.fsf@gnu.org>
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:07:51 -0400
>>From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
>>
>>We've already established (via the bug report) that some of the time,
>>the code has no idea which one is in use when comparing them. They're
>>used for relative line ordering within a particular window; if it's a
>>source window, the lines are sorted by line number, and if it's a
>>disassembly window, they're sorted by code address. So in both cases
>>it's a "line number"; that's why I favor using a single variable for
>>them, although I'm open to alternative suggestions.
>
>
> Yes, I've read the code before I replied, so I know all that already.
> Having read the code, I'm not sure that addresses are used only for
> disassembly windows and line numbers only for source windows. We
> could have more bugs; that's why I think cleaning the code is
> important.
Indeed, it isn't as simple as addresses for assembly and lines for
sources. That's what the original problem was - i686-pc-linux-gnu native
uses one and sh-elf cross (also running on i686-pc-linux-gnu) uses the
other while both are supposedly running the same simple program .
> I think it shouldn't be too hard to make the change I suggested, since
> most of it boils down to mechanically adding either the line or
> address tag whenever the respective member of the union is assigned a
> value.
Yeah, it shouldn't be too hard. It just seems redundant.
Andrew Stubbs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-20 10:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-17 14:52 Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-17 15:02 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-19 9:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-10-19 9:51 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-19 12:28 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-10-19 16:22 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-19 20:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-10-19 20:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-10-19 20:22 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-10-20 8:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-10-20 10:18 ` Andrew STUBBS [this message]
2005-10-20 16:20 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-20 17:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-10-20 19:41 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-10-21 14:55 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-21 16:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-10-21 22:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-10-21 22:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-10-24 10:28 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-24 11:06 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-10-24 12:56 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-10-25 10:45 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-11-01 16:24 ` Andrew STUBBS
2005-11-01 16:28 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-01 17:43 ` Andrew STUBBS
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=43576E68.8080804@st.com \
--to=andrew.stubbs@st.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox