From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30093 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2006 18:55:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 30084 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Feb 2006 18:55:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from xproxy.gmail.com (HELO xproxy.gmail.com) (66.249.82.204) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:55:22 +0000 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i31so887861wxd for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:55:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.89.7 with SMTP id m7mr3052803wxb; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:55:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.125.17 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:55:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8f2776cb0602211055t572223ecs93e37d5575a31ce@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:01:00 -0000 From: "Jim Blandy" To: "Gaius Mulley" Subject: Re: Enhanced language support for Modula-2 Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <87lkw5qaa9.fsf@j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <87vevg9puv.fsf@j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk> <8f2776cb0602151619w5fd8f043u3e7227e27f3567a9@mail.gmail.com> <20060220150513.GB14155@nevyn.them.org> <8f2776cb0602201322o3791841dv2916e53181e9f308@mail.gmail.com> <87lkw5qaa9.fsf@j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00397.txt.bz2 On 21 Feb 2006 10:24:46 +0000, Gaius Mulley wrote: > here is a reworking of my patch which includes a new version of the > set reading code in gdb/dwarf2read.c. Also contained is a patch to > gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo reflecting the enhancements to the Modula-2 mode. Okay. That solves that problem. :) I'm a little concerned about the change to dwarf2read.c where you create a TYPE_CODE_CHAR type for DW_ATE_signed_char and DW_ATE_unsigned_char. GDB uses TYPE_CODE_INT for C 'char' types. I have vague memories of something going wrong with printing or evaluation or something if you actually use TYPE_CODE_CHAR, and after discussion deciding to stick with TYPE_CODE_INT. But this patch causes no test suite regressions?