From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 83076 invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2016 21:29:14 -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 83035 invoked by uid 89); 11 Apr 2016 21:29:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:376 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 21:29:11 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-04.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.41]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1apjOP-00046E-BQ from Luis_Gustavo@mentor.com ; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 14:29:09 -0700 Received: from [134.86.127.233] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-04.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 14:29:08 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Fix gdb crash when trying to print the address of a synthetic C++ reference References: <1459545685-1729-1-git-send-email-martin.galvan@tallertechnologies.com> <1459776273-3434-1-git-send-email-martin.galvan@tallertechnologies.com> To: Martin Galvan , gdb-patches , Pedro Alves Reply-To: Luis Machado From: Luis Machado Message-ID: <570C1723.20908@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 21:29:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00227.txt.bz2 On 04/04/2016 02:53 PM, Martin Galvan wrote: > Looking back it seems that I could use readjust_indirect_value_type > instead of manually setting the type and enclosing type of the new > value. I'll give it a try and send a v4 if it works. > Did it work or should we not expect a v4?