From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15216 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2002 22:22:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 15207 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2002 22:22:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jackfruit.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.38.136) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Oct 2002 22:22:36 -0000 Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g98MMNL09496; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 15:22:23 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Michael Snyder Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy , Elena Zannoni Subject: Re: [rfc] split up symtab.h References: <3DA357B6.B37C5BC7@redhat.com> From: David Carlton Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 15:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <3DA357B6.B37C5BC7@redhat.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00186.txt.bz2 On Tue, 08 Oct 2002 15:09:58 -0700, Michael Snyder said: > David Carlton wrote: >> struct general_symbol_info (1) > Careful. Struct general_symbol_info is mentioned in LOTS of > places... indirectly, thru uses of the macros SYMBOL_NAME, > SYMBOL_TYPE, etc. Right, that particular count is totally misleading. Aside from the macros that you mentioned, the definitions of struct {minimal_,partial_,}symbol all need to have the definition of struct general_symbol_info available as well. So there would be nontrivial dependencies among the header files that I was proposing. (I _think_ the only nontrivial dependencies arise from 'struct general_symbol_info' and from enums, but I could be wrong.) Personally, I'd be quite tempted to have the header files for minimal_symbol, symbol, and partial_symbol all include the header file for general_symbol_info; I realize that GDB prefers to avoid that, but here is a situation where the usual substitute, namely opaque declarations of structures, doesn't work. Also, the correct location of namespace_enum isn't clear to me; too bad C doesn't support opaque declarations of enums. And the exact placements of partial_ stuff isn't clear to me: it seems plausible to me that 'struct partial_symbol' should either be in the same include file as 'struct symbol' or in the same file as 'struct partial_symtab', but which? David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu