From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18570 invoked by alias); 26 May 2005 04:12:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18562 invoked by uid 22791); 26 May 2005 04:12:43 -0000 Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 May 2005 04:12:43 +0000 Received: from farnswood.snap.net.nz (p245-tnt2.snap.net.nz [202.124.108.245]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1CC1537661; Thu, 26 May 2005 16:12:39 +1200 (NZST) Received: by farnswood.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3807862A99; Thu, 26 May 2005 05:14:03 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17045.19722.540776.341861@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 04:12:00 -0000 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Consistent format for memory addresses In-Reply-To: References: <17043.61074.262608.156551@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050525033745.GA25868@nevyn.them.org> <17043.63119.670138.172271@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <17044.59885.202702.599140@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050525212813.GA18065@nevyn.them.org> <17045.1379.28193.987032@farnswood.snap.net.nz> X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00333.txt.bz2 > > If you are saying that the address formats will only differ in their > > number of leading zeros, and not in other ways, then that is good enough > > for my purposes. > > > Well, it's a number, right? What else can possibly change in the > address format that leaves the numeric value unmodified? The only > other thing, besides leading zeros, that I can think of is sign > extension in some weird 32/64 bit situations. But that's a theory, I > don't even know if it's possible in practice. So I'd say leading > zeros is all you need to worry about for now. If you're not constrained by knowledge of the internals of GDB like myself, there are many possibilities. One command could start with a different offset. It could work in the other direction. From the start or end of the heap, the stack. It could be in octal, in decimal... ...but as you say, thats not the case. Nick