Re: [RFC/RFA] gdb extension for Harvard architectures

Andrew Cagney
2001-10-04T13:13:00Z

> Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>
>> ``Note below'':
>>
>> The basic framework attached the segment information to the pointee
>> rather than pointer. Was this an arbitrary decision or based on some
>> theoretical framework.
>
>
> Can't tell if I've adequately answered this. The design decision
> was: make the address-modifier behave syntactically like the
> const-modifier and volatile-modifier. I figured that was easiest
> to implement (already had an example), easiest to explain
> ("it's just like const"), and already known to be powerful
> enough to modify any data type. Since the address modifier
> can be used in a context similar to the const and volatile
> modifiers, I would have needed a pretty good reason to make
> it syntactically different from them. I couldn't think of one.

Thanks!

Andrew