From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 915 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2003 16:57:57 -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 894 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2003 16:57:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hawaii.kealia.com) (209.3.10.89) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2003 16:57:56 -0000 Received: by hawaii.kealia.com (Postfix, from userid 2049) id 3FFB6C635; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 08:57:56 -0800 (PST) To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/c++] cp_lookup_rtti_type, take 2 References: <20031201214039.7A1504B364@berman.michael-chastain.com> <20031205032959.GA13165@nevyn.them.org> From: David Carlton Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 16:57:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20031205032959.GA13165@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:29:59 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Rational FORTRAN, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00211.txt.bz2 On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:29:59 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz said: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 04:40:39PM -0500, Michael Chastain wrote: >> . The calls to lookup_rtti_type need a proper "block" parameter. >> The old code needed this too; I haven't regressed anything. >> I put FIXME notes in for this. > I'm not as sure as you are about this - certainly we do _not_ want a > block that came down the call chain; think about what dynamic type > is. Good point. Oops. > Ignoring anonymous namespaces for now.) Yes... > Now that we've had another major release of GDB I am extremely > tempted to rip out aCC C++ support. You'll get no complaints from me. >> . Nested types give a warning and don't work. >> It would be nice to make them work. > It's a pain. I spent quite some time trying to sort out the issues. > I'll give it a shot again after more of David's patches have been > merged. I think they should work okay after my patch that is waiting for approval gets applied? David Carlton carlton@kealia.com