Re: GDB 8.0 release/branching 2017-03-20 update

Yao Qi
2017-03-28T13:25:09Z

"Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com> writes:

> That sounds good. We want to provide a fixed set of functions and we want
> to be free to choose the best internal representation for each variant.
>

Exactly.

> How would this look in our python implementation?

I am not sure. One approach in my mind is that sub-class can overwrite
by defining its own getset.

struct PyGetSetDef py_insn_getset[] =
{
{ "data", py_insn_data, NULL, "raw instruction data", NULL},
{ "decoded", py_insn_decode, NULL, "decoded instruction", NULL},
{ "size", py_insn_size, NULL, "instruction size in byte", NULL},
{ "pc", py_insn_pc, NULL, "instruction address", NULL },
{NULL}
};

struct PyGetSetDef btpy_insn_getset[] =
{
{ "data", btpy_insn_data, NULL, "raw instruction data", NULL},
{ "decoded", btpy_insn_decode, NULL, "decoded instruction", NULL},
{ "size", btpy_insn_size, NULL, "instruction size in byte", NULL},
{ "pc", btpy_insn_pc, NULL, "instruction address", NULL },

{ "number", btpy_number, NULL, "instruction number", NULL},
{ "sal", btpy_sal, NULL, "instruction number", NULL},
{NULL}
};

--
Yao (齐尧)