From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>,
Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] gdb: make get_discrete_bounds return bool
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:19:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <71a9a506-954d-e5a4-88d0-67a3e2d97690@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201206060327.GA327270@adacore.com>
On 2020-12-06 1:03 a.m., Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 11:21:18AM -0500, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:
>> get_discrete_bounds currently has three possible return values (see its
>> current doc for details). It appears that for all callers, it would be
>> sufficient to have a boolean "worked" / "didn't work" return value.
>>
>> Change the return type of get_discrete_bounds to bool and adjust all
>> callers. Doing so simplifies the following patch.
>>
>> gdb/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * gdbtypes.h (get_discrete_bounds): Return bool, adjust all
>> callers.
>> * gdbtypes.c (get_discrete_bounds): Return bool.
>>
>> Change-Id: Ie51feee23c75f0cd7939742604282d745db59172
>
> A small reminder to remember to remove the Change-Id...
>
> Other than that, the change looks good to me.
>
> This is a very nice simplification of the interface, IMO, so thank you
> for doing that. In reading the documentation prior to this change,
> it was hard for me to wrap my head around what it the function was
> really doing. In trying to understand the initial motivation, I did
> a bit of archeology, and it goes all the way back to the initial creation
> of the sourceware repository (20 years ago already!), so no obvious
> explanation from there.
>
>> @@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ m2_language::value_print_inner (struct value *val, struct ui_file *stream,
>>
>> fputs_filtered ("{", stream);
>>
>> - i = get_discrete_bounds (range, &low_bound, &high_bound);
>> + i = get_discrete_bounds (range, &low_bound, &high_bound) ? 0 : -1;
>> maybe_bad_bstring:
>> if (i < 0)
>> {
>
> FTR, this hunk required a bit more context to investigate. We can see
> that the change looks correct when looking at how variable "i" is
> (mis)used:
>
> i = get_discrete_bounds (range, &low_bound, &high_bound) ? 0 : -1;
> maybe_bad_bstring:
> if (i < 0)
> {
> fputs_styled (_("<error value>"), metadata_style.style (),
> stream);
> goto done;
> }
>
> for (i = low_bound; i <= high_bound; i++)
>
> Because of the use of labels, it's hard to propose a simpler rewriting
> which one would feel confident about without testing...
Indeed this code is really messy. For the error handling of the
value_bit_index, it just assigns `i` again and jumps back to
maybe_bad_bstring, this is crazy. It's really tempting to do more
cleanup, but I prefer to just to the bare minimum changes in the Modula
and Pascal code.
Simon
>
>
>> diff --git a/gdb/p-valprint.c b/gdb/p-valprint.c
>> index 428b2efc656..8f785b71ea4 100644
>> --- a/gdb/p-valprint.c
>> +++ b/gdb/p-valprint.c
>> @@ -343,7 +343,8 @@ pascal_value_print_inner (struct value *val, struct ui_file *stream,
>>
>> fputs_filtered ("[", stream);
>>
>> - int bound_info = get_discrete_bounds (range, &low_bound, &high_bound);
>> + int bound_info = (get_discrete_bounds (range, &low_bound, &high_bound)
>> + ? 0 : -1);
>> if (low_bound == 0 && high_bound == -1 && TYPE_LENGTH (type) > 0)
>> {
>> /* If we know the size of the set type, we can figure out the
>
> Similar story here.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-07 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-23 16:21 [PATCH 0/4] Fix bug in value_subscript when range's high bound is not known Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-11-23 16:21 ` [PATCH 1/4] gdb: make discrete_position return optional Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-06 5:25 ` Joel Brobecker
2020-12-06 5:38 ` Joel Brobecker
2020-12-07 14:58 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-08 3:06 ` Joel Brobecker
2020-12-08 11:41 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2020-12-09 19:29 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-09 19:53 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2020-11-23 16:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] gdb: make get_discrete_bounds return bool Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-06 6:03 ` Joel Brobecker
2020-12-07 15:19 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches [this message]
2020-11-23 16:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] gdb: split get_discrete_bounds in two Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-06 7:29 ` Joel Brobecker
2020-12-07 15:49 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-11-23 16:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] gdb: fix value_subscript when array upper bound is not known Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-06 7:54 ` Joel Brobecker
2020-12-07 16:06 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-08 3:14 ` Joel Brobecker
2020-12-09 18:50 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
2020-12-09 19:57 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=71a9a506-954d-e5a4-88d0-67a3e2d97690@efficios.com \
--to=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=simon.marchi@efficios.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox