Re: [PATCH] Whack some dead code

Pedro Alves
2010-03-30T17:41:29Z

On Tuesday 30 March 2010 18:05:14, Stan Shebs wrote:
> A better term is maybe "bogus code", and my explanation is misleading.
> If you look at the locals start_pc and end_pc, you see that the original
> code's sal.symtab == 0 case does not set them before they get passed to
> tfind_1 at the bottom. I suppose one could try to salvage the sal.pc !=
> 0 case and treat it as a start_pc == end_pc situation; we'd would want
> to think how each case is supposed to be useful.

Whoops, yeah, there was a bug here. The intention was certainly for
treating sal.pc != 0 case as start_pc == end_pc. I don't know how
useful that would be. The " for address 0x....... <functname>" part
did looks a bit useful, but I won't cry over it being gone.

> It would be a little
> annoying if a typo in tfind takes you to an unexpected trace frame,
> which in turn could disable your display commands, etc.

Well, there was an obvious bug. That remark applies to all bugs. :-)

> (Incidentally, I notice that "help info line" doesn't mention the raw
> address option. Didn't it used to??)

(Hmm. I've tried gdb 5.3 (2002), and it doesn't, the help text
looks the same. Don't have older builds handy.)

--
Pedro Alves