From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 0W0xChOQWmB0TQAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:04:19 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 1C57B1EF78; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:04:19 -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 599211E590 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:04:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45033857829; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 01:04:17 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A45033857829 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1616547857; bh=vZQ4CDYsniNe8De9SCR4XoF/QbVR1ZNa+yp6TV/B+04=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=JPnz+YZFW0KS320xKw7oEzoU4OlkVJ07Aqc0lWfgVcdtraxS85YRW3oiEebh28s2z Gz+MYTTISTJUVAVHs+xD3Y82Nw7kZstdXf88b9kzX7bKZbv+bTvRLpQPU/hCbdZDmX sLahA9gjEjFygyWD8+dvOrStq7SSfwv7GaBHpzUk= Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 051553857829 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 01:04:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 051553857829 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 12O149En023273 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:04:14 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 12O149En023273 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 79B3B1E590; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:04:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] C++ compile support To: Keith Seitz , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20180810232534.481-1-keiths@redhat.com> <20180810232534.481-10-keiths@redhat.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:04:09 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180810232534.481-10-keiths@redhat.com> 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 Wed, 24 Mar 2021 01:04:09 +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 Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Hi Keith, I am from the past... On 2018-08-10 7:25 p.m., Keith Seitz wrote: > +/* Convert a struct or union type to its gcc representation. If this type > + was defined in another type, NESTED_ACCESS should indicate the > + accessibility of this type. */ > + > +static gcc_type > +compile_cplus_convert_struct_or_union (compile_cplus_instance *instance, > + struct type *type, > + enum gcc_cp_symbol_kind nested_access) > +{ > + const char *filename = nullptr; > + unsigned short line = 0; > + > + /* Get the decl name of this type. */ > + gdb::unique_xmalloc_ptr name = decl_name (TYPE_NAME (type)); > + > + /* Create a new scope for TYPE. */ > + compile_scope scope = instance->new_scope (TYPE_NAME (type), type); > + > + if (scope.nested_type () != GCC_TYPE_NONE) > + { > + /* The type requested was actually defined inside another type, > + such as a nested class definition. Return that type. */ > + return scope.nested_type (); > + } > + > + /* Push all scopes. */ > + instance->enter_scope (scope); > + > + /* First we create the resulting type and enter it into our hash > + table. This lets recursive types work. */ > + > + gcc_decl resuld; > + if (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_STRUCT) > + { > + const char *what = TYPE_DECLARED_CLASS (type) ? "struct" : "class"; I don't know if this matters, but the condition above looks reversed, can you confirm? Simon