From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-117855-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 28415 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2014 04:46:39 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 28397 invoked by uid 89); 26 Nov 2014 04:46:39 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-oi0-f44.google.com
Received: from mail-oi0-f44.google.com (HELO mail-oi0-f44.google.com) (209.85.218.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 04:46:38 +0000
Received: by mail-oi0-f44.google.com with SMTP id e131so1503385oig.31        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:46:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date         :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;        bh=3L7EVgliEnV0HNPY83KEeoOF4IYDGZcwGziy37yaCYc=;        b=O9JKc8LzMEZ+SNlMlKtA0aUku3V2VSlD/QKP3PcuvXikY6czWi/4pqZXkPVpfpUx4u         x+qCb35KqCVNKdVVI1GSJzhSn/AjLZp8rIUVddiaTPbjuAmX3WrRpmnH0bwPREk9SpSw         ly5ELpaiwI/B5kvpKYmGQfyyn5BQUSdKzUh+zb5JxZZjxk/foEvZ2D67QK7s+SHJCV9g         0sXDfx8EYKx/Nb6x+L6l9IiSJwlVmT9y+M719IiQ/b+XVUzj/sEhfyyNLGQNsZRx0h0a         2GgcgxWm9LY3c3vzBeTfNzKEriEKcW9KoVUgR44CKCFdyDp3oeKJqAwC+Q+uvGXvuTdT         NRWQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlLdkmh/uhmR7hVHTZ+fZ186RoQb6aGuPwhxCfHYyGYPZGEYoo5Bk6PviAoM5OADJ8YbPeC
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.247.137 with SMTP id ye9mr9697641oec.35.1416977196230; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:46:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.202.225.68 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:46:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CADPb22TXYTd6n3GY_=wpdTcZOwMqBFPD+Qp2ic0UJ1aw305bhA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGyQ6gxO+u9hc_6Qo8Z=-MsNgrBPruDSULYOQY-iQ+xv9d0xfw@mail.gmail.com>	<CADPb22T800NSiXg4XjOwTgwQSZfs-uSBoSku0b7tkF=CAGkzwQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CADPb22Tqr7_6c0C2y+cCicmMba=-8nFnVX18+BXowvTsLHEdwQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CADPb22TXYTd6n3GY_=wpdTcZOwMqBFPD+Qp2ic0UJ1aw305bhA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 04:46:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAGyQ6gxMbvXB-fLDiEvWLHhvr-3tgVwBMWZg6UgnWnUC143TTg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] While processing a struct die, store the method's address in its fn_field
From: Siva Chandra <sivachandra@google.com>
To: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
Cc: gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2014-11/txt/msg00647.txt.bz2

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Doug Evans <dje@google.com> wrote:
> Hi.
> While going through this is occurs to me: Do we *need* an assembler
> testcase here?
> If we're just testing lambda hand-callability, it would be preferable
> to just have a .cc test.

I preferred an assembler testcase because the problem the patch is
trying to solve does not occur if Clang is the compiler.