From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 704 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2009 14:33:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 696 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jul 2009 14:33:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:33:18 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DEB010623; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:33:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A1BA10620; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:33:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MRoUt-0007tn-H9; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:33:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:33:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sourceware.org, Pierre Muller Subject: Is bitstring support still useful? Message-ID: <20090717143315.GA29728@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sourceware.org, Pierre Muller MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00115.txt.bz2 GDB contains both type (TYPE_CODE_BITSTRING) and expression (OP_BITSTRING) support for bitstrings. This is in the way for some bitfield changes I'd like to make, and before I spend time fixing it, I'd like to know if it's still useful. OP_BITSTRING is currently dead code. It's handled in a number of places, but never generated. TYPE_CODE_BITSTRING can be generated two ways: from OP_BITSTRING (so, dead) or from the stabs reader. It's not generated from any other symbol reader, including DWARF. Does this mean it's dead or that there's something the DWARF reader should do? For now, I'm going to remove support in my local tree. Pierre, I've copied you because the most recent non-mechanical patch related to bitstrings was yours, a long while ago: 2002-05-02 Pierre Muller * p-typeprint.c (pascal_type_print_base): Add support for TYPE_CODE_STRING and TYPE_CODE_BITSTRING. (I'm not sure you'll receive my mail directly, though - something about the IPv6 addresses used by u-strasbg.fr causes my mail server a lot of grief.) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery