This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: dynamic array's upper bound evaluated as address for AVR target
- From: Pierre-Marie de Rodat <derodat at adacore dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Sivanupandi Pitchumani <Pitchumani dot Sivanupandi at atmel dot com>, "gdb at sourceware dot org" <gdb at sourceware dot org>, Andrew Burgess <andrew dot burgess at embecosm dot com>, "tom at tromey dot com" <tom at tromey dot com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:19:22 -0400
- Subject: Re: dynamic array's upper bound evaluated as address for AVR target
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <561E11A2 dot 5030206 at adacore dot com> <20151014094141 dot 54C93DAD at oc7340732750 dot ibm dot com> <20151014122638 dot GG661 at adacore dot com> <561E5A7C dot 1040902 at adacore dot com>
On 10/14/2015 09:37 AM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
And to me as well: thank you Ulrich for this crystal clear explanation.
:-) I will give it a try next week, then.
Quick update: I started to dig into this. I still have a hard time
wrapping the current implementation in my mind[1] and thinking about
what we should do exactly:
* Have different types for expressions and location lists (hence
potentially renaming existing code): looks like a big commit!
* Introduce another entry point to evaluate dynamic properties as
expressions. Looks like a small change but a weaker design: how to
evaluate depends a property depends on the property, not the evaluation
context, so it would be great to keep types distinct.
I cannot make any commitment on a schedule to implement this, though.
[1] Especially considering that dynamic properties handle only locations
that resolve to an inferior address. Location resolution for variables
donât rely on this mechanism, which is some kind of inconsistency. On
the other hand, dynamic properties are DWARF-specificâ
--
Pierre-Marie de Rodat