[PATCH] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[PATCH] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Artemiy Volkov]

This patch adds support for TYPE_CODE_ENUM values to be supplied
as right-hand side operands of the BINOP_REPEAT (@) operator. The
following should now work:

enum {
  sz = 17
};

int
main ()
{
  int arr[sz + 1] = { 0 };
  return 0; /* line 9 here */
}

(gdb) b 9
(gdb) r
(gdb) p arr@sz
$1 = {0 <repeats 17 times>}
(gdb)

A couple of tests is also included in this patch to demonstrate that it is
working as intended.

gdb/Changelog:

2016-03-20  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>

	* eval.c (evaluate_subexp_standard): Allow TYPE_CODE_ENUM to be
        the type of BINOP_REPEAT's second operand.

gdb/testsuite/Changelog:

2016-03-20  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>

	* gdb.base/printcmds.exp: Add artificial arrays tests.
---
 gdb/eval.c                           | 3 ++-
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp | 5 +++++
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gdb/eval.c b/gdb/eval.c
index 78ad946..5d32a3c 100644
--- a/gdb/eval.c
+++ b/gdb/eval.c
@@ -2427,7 +2427,8 @@ evaluate_subexp_standard (struct type *expect_type,
       if (noside == EVAL_SKIP)
 	goto nosideret;
       type = check_typedef (value_type (arg2));
-      if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_INT)
+      if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_INT
+          && TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_ENUM)
 	error (_("Non-integral right operand for \"@\" operator."));
       if (noside == EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS)
 	{
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
index 3c78a53..d599a70 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
@@ -643,6 +643,11 @@ proc test_artificial_arrays {} {
     gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@2${ctrlv}@3" \
 	"({{0, 1}, {2, 3}, {4, 5}}|\[Cc\]annot.*)" \
 	{p int1dim[0]@2@3}
+    gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@TWO" " = {0, 1}" \
+        {p int1dim[0]@TWO}
+    gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@TWO${ctrlv}@three" \
+	"({{0, 1}, {2, 3}, {4, 5}}|\[Cc\]annot.*)" \
+	{p int1dim[0]@TWO@three}
     gdb_test_escape_braces {p/x (short [])0x12345678} \
 	" = ({0x1234, 0x5678}|{0x5678, 0x1234})"
 }
-- 
2.7.3

Re: [PATCH] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Yao Qi]

Artemiy Volkov <artemiyv@acm.org> writes:

> A couple of tests is also included in this patch to demonstrate that it is
> working as intended.
>
> gdb/Changelog:
>
> 2016-03-20  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>
>

Add "PR gdb/19820" here...

> 	* eval.c (evaluate_subexp_standard): Allow TYPE_CODE_ENUM to be
>         the type of BINOP_REPEAT's second operand.
>
> gdb/testsuite/Changelog:
>
> 2016-03-20  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>
>

and here...

> 	* gdb.base/printcmds.exp: Add artificial arrays tests.

You can reference existing ChangeLog entries.

Did you run regression tests?  If the test is regression free, the patch
is OK to me with the ChangeLog entry fix I point out above.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

Re: [PATCH] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Artemiy Volkov]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 04:20:46PM +0000, Yao Qi wrote:
> Artemiy Volkov <artemiyv@acm.org> writes:
> 
> > A couple of tests is also included in this patch to demonstrate that it is
> > working as intended.
> >
> > gdb/Changelog:
> >
> > 2016-03-20  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>
> >
> 
> Add "PR gdb/19820" here...
> 
> > 	* eval.c (evaluate_subexp_standard): Allow TYPE_CODE_ENUM to be
> >         the type of BINOP_REPEAT's second operand.
> >
> > gdb/testsuite/Changelog:
> >
> > 2016-03-20  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>
> >
> 
> and here...
> 
> > 	* gdb.base/printcmds.exp: Add artificial arrays tests.
> 
> You can reference existing ChangeLog entries.

OK, will do and resend as v2.

> 
> Did you run regression tests?  If the test is regression free, the patch
> is OK to me with the ChangeLog entry fix I point out above.

Yes, I've made sure that there are no regressions.

Thank you for the review,
Artemiy

[PATCH v2] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Artemiy Volkov]

This patch adds support for TYPE_CODE_ENUM values to be supplied
as right-hand side operand of the BINOP_REPEAT (@) operator. The
following should now work:

enum {
  sz = 17
};

int
main ()
{
  int arr[sz + 1] = { 0 };
  return 0; /* line 9 here */
}

(gdb) b 9
(gdb) r
(gdb) p arr@sz
$1 = {0 <repeats 17 times>}
(gdb)

A couple of tests is also included in this patch to demonstrate that it is
working as intended.

gdb/Changelog:

2016-03-23  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>

	PR gdb/19820
	* eval.c (evaluate_subexp_standard): Allow TYPE_CODE_ENUM to be
        the type of BINOP_REPEAT's second operand.

gdb/testsuite/Changelog:

2016-03-23  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>

	PR gdb/19820
	* gdb.base/printcmds.exp: Add artificial arrays tests.
---

v1 -> v2: Add PR # information to the changelog entries.

 gdb/eval.c                           | 3 ++-
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp | 5 +++++
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gdb/eval.c b/gdb/eval.c
index 78ad946..5d32a3c 100644
--- a/gdb/eval.c
+++ b/gdb/eval.c
@@ -2427,7 +2427,8 @@ evaluate_subexp_standard (struct type *expect_type,
       if (noside == EVAL_SKIP)
 	goto nosideret;
       type = check_typedef (value_type (arg2));
-      if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_INT)
+      if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_INT
+          && TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_ENUM)
 	error (_("Non-integral right operand for \"@\" operator."));
       if (noside == EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS)
 	{
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
index 3c78a53..d599a70 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
@@ -643,6 +643,11 @@ proc test_artificial_arrays {} {
     gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@2${ctrlv}@3" \
 	"({{0, 1}, {2, 3}, {4, 5}}|\[Cc\]annot.*)" \
 	{p int1dim[0]@2@3}
+    gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@TWO" " = {0, 1}" \
+        {p int1dim[0]@TWO}
+    gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@TWO${ctrlv}@three" \
+	"({{0, 1}, {2, 3}, {4, 5}}|\[Cc\]annot.*)" \
+	{p int1dim[0]@TWO@three}
     gdb_test_escape_braces {p/x (short [])0x12345678} \
 	" = ({0x1234, 0x5678}|{0x5678, 0x1234})"
 }
-- 
2.7.3

Re: [PATCH v2] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Artemiy Volkov]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Artemiy Volkov <artemiyv@acm.org> wrote:
> This patch adds support for TYPE_CODE_ENUM values to be supplied
> as right-hand side operand of the BINOP_REPEAT (@) operator. The
> following should now work:
>
> enum {
>   sz = 17
> };
>
> int
> main ()
> {
>   int arr[sz + 1] = { 0 };
>   return 0; /* line 9 here */
> }
>
> (gdb) b 9
> (gdb) r
> (gdb) p arr@sz
> $1 = {0 <repeats 17 times>}
> (gdb)
>
> A couple of tests is also included in this patch to demonstrate that it is
> working as intended.
>
> gdb/Changelog:
>
> 2016-03-23  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>
>
>         PR gdb/19820
>         * eval.c (evaluate_subexp_standard): Allow TYPE_CODE_ENUM to be
>         the type of BINOP_REPEAT's second operand.
>
> gdb/testsuite/Changelog:
>
> 2016-03-23  Artemiy Volkov  <artemiyv@acm.org>
>
>         PR gdb/19820
>         * gdb.base/printcmds.exp: Add artificial arrays tests.
> ---
>
> v1 -> v2: Add PR # information to the changelog entries.
>
>  gdb/eval.c                           | 3 ++-
>  gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp | 5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/eval.c b/gdb/eval.c
> index 78ad946..5d32a3c 100644
> --- a/gdb/eval.c
> +++ b/gdb/eval.c
> @@ -2427,7 +2427,8 @@ evaluate_subexp_standard (struct type *expect_type,
>        if (noside == EVAL_SKIP)
>         goto nosideret;
>        type = check_typedef (value_type (arg2));
> -      if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_INT)
> +      if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_INT
> +          && TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_ENUM)
>         error (_("Non-integral right operand for \"@\" operator."));
>        if (noside == EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS)
>         {
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
> index 3c78a53..d599a70 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
> @@ -643,6 +643,11 @@ proc test_artificial_arrays {} {
>      gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@2${ctrlv}@3" \
>         "({{0, 1}, {2, 3}, {4, 5}}|\[Cc\]annot.*)" \
>         {p int1dim[0]@2@3}
> +    gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@TWO" " = {0, 1}" \
> +        {p int1dim[0]@TWO}
> +    gdb_test_escape_braces "p int1dim\[0\]${ctrlv}@TWO${ctrlv}@three" \
> +       "({{0, 1}, {2, 3}, {4, 5}}|\[Cc\]annot.*)" \
> +       {p int1dim[0]@TWO@three}
>      gdb_test_escape_braces {p/x (short [])0x12345678} \
>         " = ({0x1234, 0x5678}|{0x5678, 0x1234})"
>  }
> --
> 2.7.3
>

Ping. Is v2 good enough to go in?

Thanks,
Artemiy

Re: [PATCH v2] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Yao Qi]

Artemiy Volkov <artemiyv@acm.org> writes:

> Ping. Is v2 good enough to go in?

Yes, it is.  I thought you've pushed v2 in because it was pre-approved
in my review.  Sorry for the confusion.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

Re: [PATCH v2] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Artemiy Volkov]

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Artemiy Volkov <artemiyv@acm.org> writes:
>
>> Ping. Is v2 good enough to go in?
>
> Yes, it is.  I thought you've pushed v2 in because it was pre-approved
> in my review.  Sorry for the confusion.
>

I do not have write access to the tree. That's why I was waiting for
you or someone else to pick it up.

Thanks,
Artemiy

Re: [PATCH v2] [PR gdb/19820] gdb: allow enumeration constants as second operand of BINOP_REPEAT

[Yao Qi]

Artemiy Volkov <artemiyv@acm.org> writes:

> I do not have write access to the tree. That's why I was waiting for
> you or someone else to pick it up.

Done.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)