From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 45821 invoked by alias); 26 Jul 2015 17:28:48 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 45812 invoked by uid 89); 26 Jul 2015 17:28:47 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pd0-f181.google.com Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com (HELO mail-pd0-f181.google.com) (209.85.192.181) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:28:46 +0000 Received: by pdbbh15 with SMTP id bh15so38697883pdb.1 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:28:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.70.56.33 with SMTP id x1mr58129886pdp.47.1437931724925; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:28:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from seba.sebabeach.org.gmail.com (173-13-178-53-sfba.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.13.178.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id wp5sm25234616pab.22.2015.07.26.10.28.43 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:28:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Evans To: Pierre-Marie de Rodat Cc: Pedro Alves , GDB Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add proper handling for non-local references in nested functions References: <54F47563.4050103@adacore.com> <54FF0D05.70907@redhat.com> <550C1170.9070208@adacore.com> <55685B60.3000004@redhat.com> <55775EB0.4080701@adacore.com> <55AF5F7E.5000600@adacore.com> <55AFB35E.3030608@adacore.com> Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:28:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <55AFB35E.3030608@adacore.com> (Pierre-Marie de Rodat's message of "Wed, 22 Jul 2015 17:14:38 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00776.txt.bz2 Pierre-Marie de Rodat writes: > On 07/22/2015 04:26 PM, Doug Evans wrote: >> One thought that comes to mind when reading the patch is that >> you introduce the term "static link", and it doesn't mean what >> the casual reader will think it means. >> >> E.g., >> >> + This method is designed to work with static links (nested >> functions >> + handling). Static links are function properties whose >> evaluation return >> + the frame base address for the enclosing frame. >> >> I think we need something less ambiguous / more clear. > > Having dived in nested functions, =E2=80=9Cstatic link=E2=80=9D is curren= tly wired in > my mind to nested functions. ;-) What do you think it can be confused > with? Statically linked libraries? Mostly that there's nothing in the reading of "static link" that tells me it would be anything else. Obviously a casual reader will think it's *probably* not that, but in the absence of any cues this reader is left wondering where did this term come from. > One advantage of =E2=80=9Cstatic link=E2=80=9D is that it=E2=80=99s the t= erm which the DWARF > specification uses. GCC says =E2=80=9Cstatic chain=E2=80=9D instead and I= =E2=80=99ve read > somewhere =E2=80=9Cactivation record=E2=80=9D, although it actually means= : the record > pointed to by the static chain. Bleah, I wasn't aware of this term's usage in DWARF. That's a good point. I'd be ok with a comment in a couple of key locations that say the term is derived from DW_AT_static_link. [I know you mention it in at least one place, but IWBN if it were mentioned in, e.g., the description of block_static_link.] > I liked the one I used because of the DWARF specification vocabulary, > but I=E2=80=99m open to changing it if it=E2=80=99s confusing. > > Thanks in advance for the review!