From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id SnO+KxjEsV/UTwAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 19:13:12 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id A5D571F08B; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 19:13:12 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI 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 1FA9B1E58F for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 19:13:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BAEA3857C46; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 00:13:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCBB43858C27 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 00:13:09 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org BCBB43858C27 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.11] (173-246-6-90.qc.cable.ebox.net [173.246.6.90]) (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 5293C1E58F; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 19:13:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] Add support for printing value of DWARF-based fixed-point type objects To: Joel Brobecker References: <1604817017-25807-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <1604817017-25807-6-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <2d12525a-3a85-3f69-bfea-22166f7fd358@simark.ca> <20201115063332.GD404828@adacore.com> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 19:13:08 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201115063332.GD404828@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: , Cc: GDB patches Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2020-11-15 1:33 a.m., Joel Brobecker wrote: > In pratice, this wouldn't work. The main reason-d'etre for this function > is that fixed point types can be both a TYPE_CODE_FIXED_POINT as well > as a TYPE_CODE_RANGE of a TYPE_CODE_FIXED_POINT. What the function > above does is first call fixed_point_type_base_type in order to get > to the type which actually has the fixed_point_info, and then from > there accesses the scaling factor. > > What we can do is make that a method of struct type instead... > This is what the attached patch does. Ahh, I see. Well, I think that's fine as-is. Simon