From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14571 invoked by alias); 3 Aug 2011 19:27:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 14558 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Aug 2011 19:27:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 19:27:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p73JRCIJ000598 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 3 Aug 2011 15:27:12 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p73JRB8a014819; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 15:27:12 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p73JRAaf005721; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 15:27:10 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Don't preserve `uiout' across TRY_CATCH. References: <201108031910.42133.pedro@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 19:27:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <201108031910.42133.pedro@codesourcery.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:10:41 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2011-08/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Pedro> I think that's wrong for TRY_CATCH to do - TRY_CATCH should be a Pedro> low level exceptions framework, and it should be catch_errors and Pedro> whatever other callers that want to preserve uiout that should Pedro> guarantee uiout is preserved. I completely agree. Thanks for doing this. Want to see something (sort of) related and gross? From throw_exception: /* Perhaps it would be cleaner to do this via the cleanup chain (not sure I can think of a reason why that is vital, though). */ if (tp != NULL) { /* Clear queued breakpoint commands. */ bpstat_clear_actions (tp->control.stop_bpstat); } disable_current_display (); Pedro> `uiout' is not a great name for grepping for uses. I'll post a Pedro> followup that renames it to `current_uiout'. Thanks, that sounds great. One step closer to -Wshadow :-) Pedro> Tested on x86_64-linux. Anyone see a problem with this? It is hard to know whether it will uncover a problem somewhere, but TBH I would rather put it in and find out. I did spot-check assignments to uiout (there aren't many according to my quick grep) and didn't see anything. Tom