This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Archer project.
Re: [rfc] patch for pr8880
On 02/08/2010 12:30 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
"Sami" == Sami Wagiaalla<email@example.com> 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> + 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