From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10863 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 18:36:28 -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 10848 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 18:36:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hawaii.kealia.com) (209.3.10.89) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 18:36:27 -0000 Received: by hawaii.kealia.com (Postfix, from userid 2049) id 2032CC6CD; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:36:26 -0800 (PST) To: Elena Zannoni Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] pc bounds checking and namespaces References: <16395.7859.103028.66452@localhost.redhat.com> From: David Carlton Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:36:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <16395.7859.103028.66452@localhost.redhat.com> (Elena Zannoni's message of "Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:02:59 -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: 2004-01/txt/msg00512.txt.bz2 On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:02:59 -0500, Elena Zannoni said: > Again, a sanity check with 2.95 and -gdwarf-2 would be good. Will do. And I'll check it with GCC head, given the latest problem Michael found. :-( >> - { >> - /* Some compilers don't define a DW_AT_high_pc attribute for >> - the compilation unit. If the DW_AT_high_pc is missing, >> - synthesize it, by scanning the DIE's below the compilation unit. */ > I'd rather keep this comment around, probably at the first call. Good idea. > Ok otherwise. Thanks. David Carlton carlton@kealia.com