On 07/02/2013 03:10 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>> It could be, if we can guarantee oddball architectures don't use
>>> pointers and addresses of strange sizes, say, an arch that declares
>>> function pointers of 4 bytes.
>
> Stan> You could test both a function address and a data address, and if either
> Stan> is greater than 4 bytes, the old formats can be excluded from testing.
>
> FWIW I'm actually ok with the original patch as well.
> So if Stan is happy with it, it is ok.

What about this one?

I feel i repeated myself in the comments a little, in an attempt to make 
things clear. It may sound like a broken LP. :-)

Luis