From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20612 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2004 14:41:12 -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 20601 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2004 14:41:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Aug 2004 14:41:11 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i74Ef6e3008622 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:41:11 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i74Ef5a21079; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:41:05 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2E22B9D; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:40:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4110F576.7000102@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:41:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040801 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Hilfinger Cc: brobecker@gnat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Ada's formats References: <20040804090425.B2400F2A00@nile.gnat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040804090425.B2400F2A00@nile.gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00026.txt.bz2 > Andrew, > > You wrote: > >>> Can "we" (I hate this abuse of the Queens English) delete the existing, >>> broken code then? With that resolved, its possible to move onto the next >>> Ada problem. > > > Joel wrote: > >>> Could you explain which part of the code you're refering to? > > > You then wrote: > >>> Uses of the struct language_format_info in core GDB (which >>> translates to local_.*_format macros). Rip that out and I suspect that >>> you'll find adding ada's formatting using method rather than >>> printf formats is trivial. > > > I've finally been able to look at this seriously, and am > afraid we're still not clear on what is "broken" that needs fixing. > AFAICS, the language_format_info approach generally works in a purely > functional sense, and back when we (briefly) used it to apply Ada's > language formats for hex and octal strings, it worked just fine for > us. (Currently, I see that m2-lang.c and scm-lang.c use non-C-like > values for their language_format_info entries; is the mechanism working for > them?) I was asking if we should even support the feature of being able to print values in a language specific way. Or to approach this from another angle, in addition to supporting cut'n'paste of source code expressions into GDB, should we support cut'n'paste of GDB's output values into the source code? The conclusion was a resounding ``maybe''. Knowing that m2 is effectively dead, and that JimB (the ex Scheme maintainer) was recommending scm's removal, this leaves us with ``maybe useful'' (read dead) code (well unless that ``maybe'' gets upgraded to a ``yes'' :-). Also knowing that the code is problematic (grep for 32x64), this tells us that it's time to cut our losses. > So I am assuming that you are referring mainly to a bogosity in the > design aesthetics. I am willing to do the necessary cleanup here as > community service, even though we have no need of it for the Ada > language module, but first I would like to make quite sure I have a > clear picture of what your idea of the right solution is. Is it > simply a matter of replacing the language_format_info format strings > with functions, or did you have something else entirely in mind? If you're willing to overhaul the code in that way, and then use it for Ada, would be very much appreciated! I was putting forward that the code simply be removed. enjoy, Andrew