From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26563 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2003 18:18:54 -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 26539 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2003 18:18:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hawaii.kealia.com) (209.3.10.89) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Aug 2003 18:18:53 -0000 Received: by hawaii.kealia.com (Postfix, from userid 2049) id BCB1DBFE6; Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:18:52 -0700 (PDT) To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] generate symbols associated to namespaces References: <20030622173547.GA22603@nevyn.them.org> <20030624185019.GA24662@nevyn.them.org> <20030805175429.GA29704@nevyn.them.org> <20030805180839.GA30301@nevyn.them.org> From: David Carlton Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 18:18:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20030805180839.GA30301@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Tue, 5 Aug 2003 14:08:39 -0400") 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: 2003-08/txt/msg00066.txt.bz2 On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 14:08:39 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz said: > On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 11:06:28AM -0700, David Carlton wrote: >> On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 13:54:29 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz said: >>> Is there any particular reason not to use the global block? If so >>> might want to comment what it is. >> Yes: we never want these symbols to be found by a normal search of >> all symtabs' global blocks, because we don't trust these symbols. >> We only want them found as a last resort, once we've looked every >> place that symbols associated to classes should live. So that's >> why I stash them in a local block. I'll add a comment to that >> effect. > OK. I would have thought that the fake symtab would never have been > searched normally, though - I guess it gets chained into > objfile-> symtabs? Yeah, allocate_symtab does that automatically. I'm a little tempted not to have a symtab there at all, instead just having a special block (or even a special dictionary) that isn't associated to a symtab. That, however, runs into the issue of what to do with the 'symtab' argument to lookup_symbol in that case; we could set it to NULL, but in that case GDB might crash if some silly user typed 'break NamespaceName'. Or something. David Carlton carlton@kealia.com