From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10324 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2007 03:10:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 10315 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jun 2007 03:10:03 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.22) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:09:59 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([81.5.42.128]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id HCE90999 (AUTH halo1); Thu, 28 Jun 2007 06:10:01 +0300 (IDT) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 04:53:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: deuling@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, uweigand@de.ibm.com In-reply-to: <20070627201134.GA8087@caradoc.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:11:34 -0400) Subject: Re: [rfc] Replace macros by gdbarch functions in gdbint manual Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4678FEBE.7040209@de.ibm.com> <467B7557.9000708@de.ibm.com> <4681382D.1070708@de.ibm.com> <20070627201134.GA8087@caradoc.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-06/txt/msg00485.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:11:34 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: Markus Deuling , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, uweigand@de.ibm.com > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 09:30:19PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > +the inferior function onto the stack. In addition to pushing @var{nargs}, the > > > +code should push @var{struct_addr} (when @var{struct_return}), and the return > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > It looks like something is missing in the parens. The old text also > > had this problem; can someone suggest or guess what was meant here? > > It's unclear wording, but I understand it; struct_return is > essentially a boolean condition here. And there's a flag variable of > the same name in call_function_by_hand. So it should say "when @var{struct_return} is non-zero", right? Or maybe, since you say this is the name of an actual variable, use @code{struct_return} instead of @var?