This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFA: distinguish between pointers and addresses
- To: jimb at zwingli dot cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: RFA: distinguish between pointers and addresses
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at delorie dot com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 07:34:52 -0400 (EDT)
- CC: gdb-patches at sourceware dot cygnus dot com, law at cygnus dot com
- References: <200004102022.PAA26368@zwingli.cygnus.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
> + @section Pointers Are Not Always Addresses
> + @cindex pointer representation
> + @cindex address representation
> + @cindex word-addressed machines
> + @cindex separate data and code address spaces
> + @cindex spaces, separate data and code address
> + @cindex address spaces, separate data and code
> + @cindex code pointers, word-addressed
> + @cindex converting between pointers and addresses
> + @cindex D10V addresses
Thanks for an extensive indexing!
> + For example, the Mitsubishi D10V is a 16-bit processor that uses 32-bit
> + instructions.@footnote{Some D10V instructions are actually pairs of
The @footnote should come before the dot which ends the sentence, not
after it.
> + To cope with architectures like this --- the D10V is not the only one!
> + --- GDB tries to distinguish between @code{addresses}, which are byte
> + numbers, and @code{pointers}, which are the target's representation of
I think you need to use either @dfn or @emph here, instead of @code.
The latter is for code identifiers, whereas you want an emphasis as
far as I understand.
> + This yields an address
> + appropriate GDB can use to read target memory, disassemble, etc.
I think the word ``appropriate'' should be deleted from this
sentence.
Other than these minor comments, the docs patches are approved.