This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [commit] Use bfd_byte in value.h
> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 18:08:40 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> Like I mentioned on gdb@, these are for warnings you get when building
> with GCC 4 (or for that matter, any modern compiler). vis:
>
> cagney@tornado$ cat -n s.c
> 1 char *c;
> 2 signed char *s;
> 3 unsigned char *u;
> 4
> 5 void foo (void)
> 6 {
> 7 c = s;
> 8 c = u;
> 9 s = u;
> 10 }
> $ gcc --version
> gcc (GCC) 4.0.0 20050412 (Red Hat 4.0.0-0.42)
> ...
> $ gcc -c s.c
> s.c: In function foo:
> s.c:7: warning: pointer targets in assignment differ in signedness
> s.c:8: warning: pointer targets in assignment differ in signedness
> s.c:9: warning: pointer targets in assignment differ in signedness
But why should we solve this with bfd_byte? Why not introduce GDB's
own data type, like gdb_byte or some such?
BFD is just a library; there's no need to pollute our name space with
BFD's. It's IMHO unclean.
But I already said this, and was already ignored when I did, sigh...