From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4240 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2012 19:45:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 4181 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Apr 2012 19:45:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:45:20 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q3PJjHAh003117 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:45:17 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3PJjFRM024642 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:45:16 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Siva Chandra , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC - doc] Add note about the possibility of symbols getting moved across blocks References: <83bomgfcbt.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:02:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <83bomgfcbt.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:24:54 +0300") Message-ID: <87ipgna94k.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (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: 2012-04/txt/msg00888.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:36:20 +0530 >> From: Siva Chandra >> >> A @code{gdb.Block} is iterable. The iterator returns the symbols >> -(@pxref{Symbols In Python}) local to the block. >> +(@pxref{Symbols In Python}) local to the block. Users using this >> +feature should keep in mind that future improvements to the internal >> +representation, of symbols and symbol tables, can move symbols across >> +blocks within a symbol table. Eli> Thanks. But I still don't see how the warning is useful. What should Eli> I do or not do if I want to avoid whatever dangers you warn me about? You could test new versions of gdb to be sure they conform to your expectations. Tom