This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Archer project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [rfc] patch for pr8880

On 02/08/2010 12:30 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
"Sami" == Sami Wagiaalla<> writes:

Sami> This was a long chase but an easy fix. Sami> Thoughts ?

Lots of formatting nits.

Also I have a few more substantive comments.

Sami>  +struct value *
Sami>  +value_at_value (struct value *value)
Sami>  +{
Sami>  +  return value_at(TYPE_TARGET_TYPE (value_type(value)),
Sami>  +                  value_as_address(value));

Why not just use value_ind?

value_ind works. I just missed it :)

Sami> @@ -2104,6 +2111,9 @@ value_struct_elt (struct value **argp, struct value **args,

Modifying value_struct_elt seems dangerous.  This is called from many
places in the code, including some which don't expect ADL to be used --
e.g., Java, Ada.

Can this be done by the caller somehow instead?
Or perhaps some refactoring is needed.

I could put this code in a function to be called from value_x_binop and value_x_unop. That would at least avoid the awkward argument counting but not earlier than that since the arguments need to have been evaluated and/or add a check for la_language == language_cplus.

Also, ADL should only be done for unqualified names.
It isn't clear to me that this change satisfies that requirement.

Let me look into this. It might be a general problem I don't think gdb ever differentiates between qualified and unqualified names

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]