Re: [RFA] Add type support for Ada

Aidan Skinner
2002-10-01T03:17:58Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1631 bytes --]

On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 02:25:59AM -0700, Paul N. Hilfinger wrote

Thanks for answering these Paul. :)

> > It looks to me as if the string cleanup stuff is distinct from the
> > fixed instance stuff. These should be submitted as separate patches.
>
> They definitely are logically separate changes.

Yeah, I'll split and resubmit and probably take the opportunity to
include some more string cleanup stuff, rather than just the bits that
ada-* reference...

> > Should base_type use the tortoise-and-hare algorithm to detect cycles?
>
> An interesting suggestion. However, there is at least one existing
> place where GDB doesn't bother. Compare with the following (non-Ada-

I think it's worthwhile doing here, and if it works nicely it can be
stolen for other places. My next revision of this patch will include
this.

> Umm. Interesting questions. As I recall, I had the impression that
> a self-referencing range type COULD occur legitimately, but given that was

I think they can, but my current understanding of the gdb type system
probably bears some resemblence to swiss cheese. ;)

I'll experiment a bit with trying to create one and see what I can find.

> 4 years ago, my memory could be faulty. I suspect these tests were simply
> bullet-(or segfault)-proofing. Replacing the NULL check at least with
> an error would probably be a worthy experiment.

Sounds like a plan.

- Aidan

--
aidan@velvet.net http://www.velvet.net/~aidan/ aim:aidans42
http://www.livejournal.com/users/aidan_skinner/
finger for pgp key: 01AA 1594 2DB0 09E3 B850 C2D0 9A2C 4CC9 3EC4 75E1

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 230 bytes --]