From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31688 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2003 18:47:28 -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 31655 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2003 18:47:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp3.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.14.172) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 2003 18:47:27 -0000 Received: (from root@localhost) by smtp3.Stanford.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9) id h5AIlPKs008903 for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:47:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (jackfruit.Stanford.EDU [171.64.38.136]) by smtp3.Stanford.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5AIlKgj008835; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:47:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5AIlJj05714; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:47:19 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Elena Zannoni Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy Subject: Re: [rfa] struct dictionary References: <16101.3585.739945.993550@localhost.redhat.com> <16102.9919.32103.991732@localhost.redhat.com> From: David Carlton Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:47:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <16102.9919.32103.991732@localhost.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: 2003-06/txt/msg00334.txt.bz2 On Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:43:11 -0400, Elena Zannoni said: >> >> -static struct block *new_block (int); >> >> +static struct block *new_block (int function); >> >> > can this take an enum parameter with some meaningful names? >> >> Well, I'm just using it as a boolean, so it seems to me that doing an >> enum would be a little funny. How about I rename the argument to >> function_p, or is_function, or something like that? But if you'd >> prefer an enum, I could do something like >> >> enum block_type { FUNCTION, NON_FUNCTION }; >> >> instead. > For me the real problem is to understand the code that does the > call. I don't know what 1 or 0 means at that point w/o going looking > for the function definition. And I lose my train of thoughts. That makes sense: an enum it is, then. (And in a year or two, we can switch GDB over to C++, and have an actual boolean type, but never mind that.) >> >> @@ -493,6 +495,11 @@ dump_symtab (struct objfile *objfile, st >> >> fprintf_filtered (outfile, " under "); >> >> gdb_print_host_address (BLOCK_SUPERBLOCK (b), outfile); >> >> } >> >> +#if 0 >> >> + /* NOTE: carlton/2003-04-28: If we really want to be able to >> >> + print out something here, we'll need to add an extra >> >> + dictionary method just for that purpose. */ >> >> + >> >> > Hmmm, I think we should. We don't want to change gdb's behavior. >> >> Well, it's for a maint command, so we can really do whatever we want >> here. But if you think that's an important part of the info, I'll add >> the extra method. > thanks yes. Will do, then. >> I'll make those changes and commit it tomorrow afternoon (unless >> exam grading takes longer than I expect), if nobody complains; and >> I'll be spending all day Thursday doing GDB stuff as well, so I'll be >> available if I accidentally break anything... > ok, great. BTW, i have started setting up the same test framework > that Michael Chastain uses for his tests. I have done a preliminary > run, but I screwed up the combinations of gcc and binutils to test > with, so I'll get back to that tomorrow, and I should be able to help > with testing for gdb6. Cool! I miss his test runs. David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu