From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Cogen <cogen@ll.mit.edu>
To: dan@cgsoftware.com
Cc: kettenis@wins.uva.nl, gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: gdb seg violation during print command
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 11:06:00 -0000
Message-id: <200005041802.OAA23768@ll.mit.edu>
References: <bt2ne3cq.fsf@dynamic-addr-88-117.resnet.rochester.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2000-05/msg00020.html

> First off, your code is broken. You claim to return an int, but don't.
> This is what is causing the segfault in gdb.
> It's impossible for us to not believe the compiler when it says "this
> function returns an int". We expect it to return an int.

Sorry, that's not it. I have also tried the following:

#include <iostream>

int tteesstt11 (int)
{
  cerr << "\n";
  return 4;
}

int main ()
{
}

print tteesstt11(1) from a breakpoint in main() still causes gdb to seg
fault. Indeed, I have tried lots of forms for tteesstt11; they all seg fault.

> In the newer gdb, what'll happen is you'll get no segfault, but a weird number
> returned, which will actually the address of the function, which is
> the last value we have around, i guess.

Have you actually tried this or are you supposing? Where can I get the "newer"
gdb? What version is the "newer" gdb?

-- DavidC