Re: [PATCH] Fix stepping bug associated with non-contiguous blocks

[Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>]

>>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com> writes:

Kevin> After spending a few minutes looking at things, I now have an
Kevin> opinion...

Kevin> VAX is, historically, a very important target.  For a long time (and
Kevin> perhaps even now), it was considered to be the canonical example of a
Kevin> CISC architecture.

Kevin> Support still exists in GCC, though it's not clear to me if it
Kevin> actually works.  I saw recent patches (from April, 2019) from someone
Kevin> who is trying to get VAX support in GCC to work again.

Kevin> Given that GCC still has code which provides VAX architecture
Kevin> support, I think that GDB should do likewise.  I think that we
Kevin> should attempt to not break it (anymore than it's already broken?),
Kevin> but I also don't think we should attempt to test it beyond making
Kevin> sure that it still builds.

This all sounds reasonable to me.  Having a hook like this stay around
isn't so very expensive.  Thanks for looking into this.

Tom