This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
[PATCH v2 07/13] evaluate_subexp_standard: Factor out OP_VAR_VALUE handling.
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:32:03 +0100
- Subject: [PATCH v2 07/13] evaluate_subexp_standard: Factor out OP_VAR_VALUE handling.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx02.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx02.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=palves at redhat dot com
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 5FF38120C2
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 5FF38120C2
- References: <1499959929-29497-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com>
A following patch will want to call the new evaluate_var_value
function in another spot.
gdb/ChangeLog:
yyyy-mm-dd Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* eval.c (evaluate_var_value): New function, factored out from ...
(evaluate_subexp_standard): ... here.
---
gdb/eval.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/eval.c b/gdb/eval.c
index cb41a4a..a97f4a9 100644
--- a/gdb/eval.c
+++ b/gdb/eval.c
@@ -676,6 +676,39 @@ make_params (int num_types, struct type **param_types)
return type;
}
+/* Helper for evaluating an OP_VAR_VALUE. */
+
+static value *
+evaluate_var_value (enum noside noside, const block *blk, symbol *var)
+{
+ /* JYG: We used to just return value_zero of the symbol type if
+ we're asked to avoid side effects. Otherwise we return
+ value_of_variable (...). However I'm not sure if
+ value_of_variable () has any side effect. We need a full value
+ object returned here for whatis_exp () to call evaluate_type ()
+ and then pass the full value to value_rtti_target_type () if we
+ are dealing with a pointer or reference to a base class and print
+ object is on. */
+
+ struct value *ret = NULL;
+
+ TRY
+ {
+ ret = value_of_variable (var, blk);
+ }
+
+ CATCH (except, RETURN_MASK_ERROR)
+ {
+ if (noside != EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS)
+ throw_exception (except);
+
+ ret = value_zero (SYMBOL_TYPE (var), not_lval);
+ }
+ END_CATCH
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
/* Helper for evaluating an OP_VAR_MSYM_VALUE. */
static value *
@@ -763,37 +796,9 @@ evaluate_subexp_standard (struct type *expect_type,
(*pos) += 3;
if (noside == EVAL_SKIP)
return eval_skip_value (exp);
-
- /* JYG: We used to just return value_zero of the symbol type
- if we're asked to avoid side effects. Otherwise we return
- value_of_variable (...). However I'm not sure if
- value_of_variable () has any side effect.
- We need a full value object returned here for whatis_exp ()
- to call evaluate_type () and then pass the full value to
- value_rtti_target_type () if we are dealing with a pointer
- or reference to a base class and print object is on. */
-
- {
- struct value *ret = NULL;
-
- TRY
- {
- ret = value_of_variable (exp->elts[pc + 2].symbol,
- exp->elts[pc + 1].block);
- }
-
- CATCH (except, RETURN_MASK_ERROR)
- {
- if (noside == EVAL_AVOID_SIDE_EFFECTS)
- ret = value_zero (SYMBOL_TYPE (exp->elts[pc + 2].symbol),
- not_lval);
- else
- throw_exception (except);
- }
- END_CATCH
-
- return ret;
- }
+ return evaluate_var_value (noside,
+ exp->elts[pc + 1].block,
+ exp->elts[pc + 2].symbol);
case OP_VAR_MSYM_VALUE:
(*pos) += 3;
return evaluate_var_msym_value (noside,
--
2.5.5