From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7841 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2014 07:57:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 7812 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jun 2014 07:57:29 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mga14.intel.com Received: from mga14.intel.com (HELO mga14.intel.com) (192.55.52.115) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 07:57:28 +0000 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Jun 2014 00:52:31 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from kboell-mobl2.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [172.28.205.55]) ([172.28.205.55]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Jun 2014 00:51:23 -0700 Message-ID: <53995BFA.60109@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 07:57:00 -0000 From: Keven Boell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Keven Boell , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, sanimir.agovic@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/23] dwarf: add dwarf3 DW_OP_push_object_address opcode References: <1401861266-6240-1-git-send-email-keven.boell@intel.com> <1401861266-6240-2-git-send-email-keven.boell@intel.com> <20140610095445.GA5259@adacore.com> <53984AE9.7020200@linux.intel.com> <20140611130815.GC4709@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20140611130815.GC4709@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-06/txt/msg00489.txt.bz2 > I understand this part, but the main part of my question is about > the fact that, most of the time, we manipulate "struct value" objects, > which may not represent addressable entities. For instance, let's say > I have a struct value whose type is a TYPE_CODE_ARRAY. If I need to > resolve the value's type, how should I be doing it? Perhaps, the > question in itself suggest the introduction of a function that would > take a value, and returned a value whose time is resolved? > But this would still require the address to be communicated to the property evaluation functions as the type still needs to be resolved using resolve_dynamic_type. Usually resolve_dynamic_type will be called through value_from_contents_and_address, which generates you a resolve type in a value object. Do you have a concrete Fortran code example, where you think the current implementation might go wrong? Keven