From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7136 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2002 05:59:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7129 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 05:59:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 05:59:21 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA15979; Sun, 1 Dec 2002 07:59:07 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 21:59:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Andrew Cagney cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] New method find_frame_sal() In-Reply-To: <3DE6C819.5040500@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00767.txt.bz2 On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: > While cleaning up accesses to the `struct frame_info', I kept coming > across code snippits like: > > sal = find_pc_line (fi->pc, > (fi->next != (struct frame_info *) NULL > && !(get_frame_type (fi->next) == SIGTRAMP_FRAME) > && !(get_frame_type (fi->next) == DUMMY_FRAME))); > > (Originally it was worse, as there was also fi->signal_handler_caller > and PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY (fi->pc, fi->frame, fi->frame).) > > The attached patch adds the function: > > find_frame_sal(fi, &sal); > > that encapsulates all of the above. Should this method be documented in gdbint.texinfo perhaps?