From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13997 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2009 21:54:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 13988 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Apr 2009 21:54:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:54:36 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3GLsYtW026633 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:54:34 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n3GLsXJ0017923; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:54:33 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-12-173.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.12.173]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3GLsW1u017060; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:54:32 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 6C0C150830B; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:54:31 -0600 (MDT) To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] [4/5] Types reference counting [varobj-validation] References: <20090411102215.GE32624@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:54:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20090411102215.GE32624@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Sat\, 11 Apr 2009 12\:22\:15 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00394.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Jan> As varobj_invalidate was unconditionally invalidating any local Jan> varobjs more often calls to varobj_invalidate could become more Jan> intrusive to the user so I also fixed varobj_invalidate to care Jan> only about varobjs bound to the specific objfile. I am not sure about this implementation. It seems to me that a varobj expression can span multiple objfiles. So, don't we have to use the same logic as Paul's recent "display" change to determine whether a varobj expression is invalid? Or am I missing something? I ask because it looks like we have existing bugs here. Tom