From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29599 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2012 21:01:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 29591 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Nov 2012 21:01:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Nov 2012 21:01:11 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qA1L166H031574 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 17:01:07 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qA1L15oD025759 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 1 Nov 2012 17:01:05 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] class-local typedef substitutions References: <87vcfphdl8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87sjabrx4g.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <5091795B.7020506@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 21:01:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <5091795B.7020506@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:17:47 +0000") Message-ID: <87hap9qbqm.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg00028.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Tom> More testing revealed an oddity in this code (a latent bug exposed by Tom> the subsequent Python patch); and the fix I chose required some changes Tom> to some MI test cases as well. The particular change was that Tom> previously gdb could emit "long int" but now it will emit just "long" -- Tom> I consider this to be an ok (perhaps even preferable) change. Pedro> I'm confused and curious at why such a change would be necessary. I Pedro> couldn't find it from a quick look over the patch. Pedro> Can you expand a little? Does this also affect the CLI? It has been a while, but I think the difference depends on whether the type name is sent through canonicalization or not. Pedro> Why expect both long and "long int"? Is this compiler / debug format Pedro> dependent, perhaps? I will take another look and figure it out. Tom