This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [commit] new observer.[hc] files
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:22:56 -0500
- Subject: Re: [commit] new observer.[hc] files
- References: <20030228072243.GD6112@gnat.com>
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 11:22:43PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> As requested by Andrew in:
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-02/msg00773.html
>
> I checked the attached files in. There have slightly been modified from
> the file originally sent: added the copyright headers, some documentation,
> introduced the notion of subject from the "Design Patterns" book, added
> a missing "static" keyword for an internal function, etc.
> /* The internal generic observer. */
>
> typedef void (generic_observer_notification_ftype) (const void *data,
> const void *args);
>
> struct observer
> {
> generic_observer_notification_ftype *notify;
> /* No memory management needed for the following field for now. */
> void *data;
> };
> static void
> observer_normal_stop_notification_stub (const void *data,
> const void *unused_args)
> {
> observer_normal_stop_ftype *notify = (observer_normal_stop_ftype *) data;
> (*notify) ();
> }
Is this extra indirection really necessary? Because I'm 99% sure it
won't work on several 64-bit platforms. Function pointers and data
pointers are not required to have the same size; on IA-64 I believe
that a function pointer is 128 bits and a data pointer is 64 bits.
Why not require all observer functions to take the same arguments
instead?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer