Re: [rfa] ALL_OBJFILE_MSYMBOLS

[Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>]

Okay, I've committed this change.

(My test run completed with no new failures.)

David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu> writes:

> On 31 Jan 2003 15:01:24 -0500, Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com> said:
> 
> > I think I'd prefer the patch below.  Could you try it out and see if
> > it works as well?
> 
> Yes, it also fixes the bug I'm seeing.
> 
> > This was messier than I had expected.
> 
> Yah.
> 
> > (Which is a great example of one reason C macros suck and Lisp
> > macros don't --- in case that's an emotionally charged issue for
> > anyone else out there like it is for me.  :) )
> 
> I thought for a while about good responses to this, but I think I'll
> just leave it alone for now. :-)
> 
> > But it would be better anyway for an empty minsym table to have a
> > single, consistent representation.
> 
> That was my first reaction, too.  But while I was thinking about how
> to do that, I noticed that ALL_MSYMBOLS already dealt with the
> possibility of a NULL entry, so I just went with that out of laziness.
> 
> Like you, trusting the count sounds like a good idea.  And, even if
> you go with a terminating entry, having it be a fake symbol instead
> of, say, a NULL pointer is pretty weird, too.  But making either of
> those changes sounds like too much (fallible) work for too little
> benefit.
> 
> > So here's a patch which simply ensures that every objfile's minsym
> > table has a terminating entry, and makes some appropriate accompanying
> > changes.  The tests are still running, but I haven't noticed any
> > regressions yet.
> 
> Seems sensible to me.  I didn't do a full testsuite run, but I did
> apply it to my branch and try to trigger the bug I'd been seeing
> there, and your patch does protect against the bug.
> 
> David Carlton
> carlton@math.stanford.edu