From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-59785-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 24236 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2008 14:51:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 24170 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Nov 2008 14:51:19 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.188)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:50:42 +0000
Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so1597815tib.12         for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:50:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.110.15.9 with SMTP id 9mr8059708tio.48.1226328639538;         Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:50:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.110.103.3 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:50:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <daef60380811100650v44c5251dq1a792a37b6b0c8aa@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:45:00 -0000
From: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>
To: "Andreas Schwab" <schwab@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Process record and replay, 8/10
Cc: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-Reply-To: <je1vxj8wyh.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <daef60380811052350v3232a91ep6241e687f2f18be@mail.gmail.com> 	 <uljvvsg85.fsf@gnu.org> 	 <daef60380811100628u7a774f8aod43edc7f0810145a@mail.gmail.com> 	 <je1vxj8wyh.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
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
X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg00176.txt.bz2

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 22:41, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> teawater <teawater@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>>> +      /* arith & logic */
>>>> +    case 0x00 ... 0x05:
>>>> +    case 0x08 ... 0x0d:
>>>> +    case 0x10 ... 0x15:
>>>> +    case 0x18 ... 0x1d:
>>>> +    case 0x20 ... 0x25:
>>>> +    case 0x28 ... 0x2d:
>>>> +    case 0x30 ... 0x35:
>>>> +    case 0x38 ... 0x3d:
>>>
>>> Is this valid ISO C?
>>
>> I am not sure. Could you tell me?
>
> Definitely not.  *Note (gcc)Case Ranges::.
>

Thanks.

So I think I need to change it.
Does there have some easy way like ... can instead ... in ISO C?
Cause:
case 0x01:
case 0x02:
...
will waste too much line.



> Andreas.
>
> --
> Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
> SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstra=DFe 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany
> PGP key fingerprint =3D 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
> "And now for something completely different."
>