From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jim Blandy To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: addresses and pointers may be different sizes while printing Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 14:51:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <20010628223546.BDE7F5E9CB@zwingli.cygnus.com> <3B43F682.1040502@cygnus.com> <3B45572F.3020708@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00164.html Andrew Cagney writes: > I think that is still too vague and fuzzy. There needs to be a concrete > example and a testcase. > > These are probably something to do separate to these patches but they do > need doing. At present, there is nothing explaining (and testing) GDB's > behavour on a harvard architecture. Oh, I got confused. What I posted there was a rationale for my change to value_cast, which (I think) is more than adequately documented with the patch above. What you want is an explanation of our whole philosophy regarding pointers, addresses, separate address spaces, and so on. I'll chew on it. Perhaps now's the time to restart the discussion of Harvard Architecture machines, put together a coherent picture of how things are supposed to behave, and document it. In the meantime, can my change go in? :)