From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 3Uc9NkGK9WDfOgAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:20:49 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id CE6691EDF2; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:20:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DE3C1E01B for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:20:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51C7394FC3C for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:20:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C51C7394FC3C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1626704448; bh=e2zyuSP0NXXlwTkCFHjm5f+QHyc4MHZ4wOLxTZfdpjE=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=R9gvv+xBe8UcF4M8JQ4KRhCEgGFmKKWQmP3/pBEzGddqFYDsH1KluY9RX6WkdB62x ALuat0tbfKyzRO7O1kDcBSkaZ/yVVzs4eKiG1CUlq4mKEdZHm9d4buGkUTEIQYlM2+ Tcd6jKgjM52Pydw4BXEW45A243ZY3VVhajbj9iM8= Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1349384F01A for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:20:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org E1349384F01A Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 16JEJLVP011000 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:19:27 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 16JEJLVP011000 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (192-222-157-6.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.157.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C1A91E01B; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:19:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/16] gdb: make cmd_list_element var an optional union To: Lancelot SIX References: <20210714045520.1623120-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <20210714045520.1623120-16-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <20210718154429.27arnsgirctcjett@ubuntu.lan> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 10:19:21 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210718154429.27arnsgirctcjett@ubuntu.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:19:21 +0000 X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > + setting_variable v { .bool_var = ¶m_value->boolval }; > + return pascm_param_value (type, v, arg_pos, func_name); I thought about doing something like this, my only itch is that declaration of `setting_variable v`. It is confusing to see it just setting the bool_var field, regardless of the actual type. I understand it works because the pointer value is the same in any case, but to be pedantic it should be something like: setting_variable v; switch (type) { case var_boolean: v.bool_var = ¶m_value->boolval; break; case var_auto_boolean: v.auto_boolean_var = ¶m_value->autoboolval; break; // and so on } It's a bit more verbose, but it's written only once, and it's not like new var types are added every week. I would be fine changing my patch to use your approach with that change, if you are. Simon