From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-69899-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 20684 invoked by alias); 3 Feb 2010 04:52:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 20673 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Feb 2010 04:52:14 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 04:52:10 +0000
Received: from int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.17]) 	by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o134q9U5009079 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) 	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Tue, 2 Feb 2010 23:52:09 -0500
Received: from qcore.mollernet.net (vpn-8-240.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.8.240]) 	by int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o134q8B0031266; 	Tue, 2 Feb 2010 23:52:08 -0500
Message-ID: <4B6900F8.5080307@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 04:52:00 -0000
From: Chris Moller <cmoller@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tromey@redhat.com
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Patch for PR 10728
References: <4B689FD2.9070300@redhat.com> <m37hqvyywa.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <m37hqvyywa.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-02/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2

On 02/02/10 18:57, Tom Tromey wrote:
> I didn't read the old code in depth; is there a way to make this
> self-initializing?
>    

Actually, it just occurred to me, the top level of the recursion is at 
cp_print_value_fields and the only time the recurse parm is zero is 
probably at top-level.  I expect I /can/ make it self-initialising and 
self-cleanering-uppering...