From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7258 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2006 12:53:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 7249 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Dec 2006 12:53:15 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:53:07 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GsfDg-0006nG-A1 for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 13:52:52 +0100 Received: from 73-198.umostel.ru ([82.179.73.198]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 13:52:52 +0100 Received: from ghost by 73-198.umostel.ru with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 13:52:52 +0100 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Vladimir Prus Subject: Re: MI: fix base members in references Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:53:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <200611291555.42209.ghost@cs.msu.su> <17783.60807.26167.746362@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-12/txt/msg00118.txt.bz2 Nick Roberts wrote: > > I guess we need to > > first > > commit the primary references patch and then fix c_number_of_children. > > Not that I find references to pointers very common thing, but better be > > correct. > > The patch below seems to fix it for me. Its a diff on 1.63 _with_ your > yet to be committed changes. I would have preferred if instead of adding if, the code was modified to look at value_type (var->value) as opposed to var->type The latter is the type of the varobj expression as it is in source program. The former is the value we're actually showing. It makes sense to use value_type (var->value) for all presentation purposes. > > Since we have been the only two people directly contributing to for a > while now MI, and as it would stop the patches piling up, perhaps Vladimir > (if > interested) I don't very well understand maintainership structure in gdb, but I would surely appreciate a permission to commit MI patches directly. - Volodya