From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4456 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2007 09:41:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 4449 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jun 2007 09:41:45 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (HELO wa-out-1112.google.com) (209.85.146.183) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 09:41:43 +0000 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id l35so2124813waf for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:41:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.204.13 with SMTP id b13mr5377481wag.1181554901399; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:41:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.79.6 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:41:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 09:41:00 -0000 From: "Rob Quill" To: "Markus Deuling" Subject: Re: Scope Checking Patch Cc: gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <466D07FE.4080800@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <466D07FE.4080800@de.ibm.com> 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: 2007-06/txt/msg00073.txt.bz2 On 11/06/07, Markus Deuling wrote: > Hi Rob, > > I haven't gone through your patch, but I have a suggestion. If I do a patch for GDB I do it like that: > > a) Checkout current head > b) Create a copy of that directory e.g. gdb.new > c) Do my changes in gdb.new > d) Create patch by: diff -urN gdb/ gdb.new/ > diff-file Thanks. I tried this, but I ended up with a 214MB diff file. I'm not sure why this is, as I did a make distclean on both copies, I think it may be due to the testsuite results not having been cleaned or something. Does anyone have any ideas what to do? Thanks, Rob > Then you the two diff files in one file and its better readable. Also its easier to apply just one file instead of two. > > Regards, > Markus > > Rob Quill wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > This is the first patch I have ever submitted to an open source > > project, so I'm a little bit unsure of the process. The patch adds the > > ability to check if a variable is in scope, as descibed here: > > > > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2006-11/msg00149.html > > > > I have attached the diffs for the two files I've changed. However, I > > am seeing some regressions against the current cvs, which I can't > > understand, so I was wondering if a) the regressions happen for anyone > > esle? (which presumably it does), b) if anyone could offer any > > suggestions as to the cause, and c) give thier opinions on the patch. > > > > The patch allows the scope of constants, variables and variables in > > classes/structures, by using $in_scope(variable_name) as an > > expression, with value 1 if variable_name is in scope and 0 if it is > > not. > > > > Any help and thoughts you can offer is much appreciated. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Rob > > > > > -- > Markus Deuling > GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE > deuling@de.ibm.com > >