Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA/stabs] Fix for line table problems (was: Re: [RFC] Gdb line table implementation tweak)
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 13:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <npk7rnb09s.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020329160533.A24451@nevyn.them.org>


Daniel Jacobowitz <dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 03:59:13PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
> > 
> > Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
> > > I think so.  Want me to wait for Michael C's report first?
> > 
> > If doing so wouldn't delay 5.2 too much, yes.
> 
> OK, I will.  Could you look over:
>   http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-03/msg00415.html
> (the equivalent patch for DWARF-2), if you get a chance?

So, it's not that the first line number marker is *missing*, it's that
it's *misplaced*.  So repositioning the line is sufficient --- we
don't need to make up an extra entry.  Is that right?

If so, it seems fine, some minor comments:

Could you move the code that initializes the function range list and
the code that adds a new entry to the function range list into their
own functions?

Could check_cu_functions complain when it has to back up a line entry?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-04-04 21:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-03-25  9:58 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-03-27 21:19 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-29 10:35   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-03-29 12:59     ` Jim Blandy
2002-04-03 18:59       ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-04 14:34         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
     [not found]       ` <20020329160533.A24451@nevyn.them.org>
2002-04-04 13:51         ` Jim Blandy [this message]
2002-04-04 14:25           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-29 13:21 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-27 13:43 [RFC] Gdb line table implementation tweak Jim Blandy
2002-02-27 15:24 ` Fred Fish
2002-03-16 22:51   ` [RFA/stabs] Fix for line table problems (was: Re: [RFC] Gdb line table implementation tweak) Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-03-18 13:44     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-03-20 12:30     ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-21 10:00       ` Jim Blandy
2002-03-21 11:03     ` Jim Blandy
2002-03-21 12:56       ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-25 14:37         ` Jim Blandy
2002-03-21 12:57       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-03-21 15:28         ` Andrew Cagney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=npk7rnb09s.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com \
    --to=jimb@redhat.com \
    --cc=dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox