From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-96766-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 11850 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2012 15:08:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 11828 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Dec 2012 15:08:46 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,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; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:08:33 +0000
Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qBAF8WCH027052	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:08:32 -0500
Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1])	by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qBAF8VBZ027879	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);	Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:08:31 -0500
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [3/3] RFC: tag name completion
References: <87obiqlrv7.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <50C269D3.10306@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:08:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <50C269D3.10306@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Fri, 07	Dec 2012 22:12:35 +0000")
Message-ID: <87vccarllc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.90 (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: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-12/txt/msg00239.txt.bz2

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

Pedro> I'm not that much familiar with this part of the code.  I'm just
Pedro> wondering about struct vs class.  GDB treats both mostly
Pedro> interchangeably, e.g., with "struct ABC {};", ptype "class ABC"
Pedro> will find and print the struct.  Would "class A<tab>" still
Pedro> complete to "class ABC" with this patch?

It will work because:

#define TYPE_CODE_CLASS TYPE_CODE_STRUCT

I think we should probably just drop this and always use TYPE_CODE_STRUCT.

Tom