This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB 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: [RFA]: File-I/O patch, Documentation


On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 10:25:04AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 09:33:08AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > c99 (what ever the standard) formalized a number of explicitly sized 
> > > types (int32 et.al. I believe).  I think this table should be specified 
> > > using those types.  The alternative is to generalize the 
> > > sim/common/sim-types.h file and then specify the sizes using that.
> > 
> > I don't think so.  The protocol is more or less self-contained.  All
> > definitions are based on the assumption, that you'll never find a
> > really matching combination of values as they are defined on all
> > machines.  Looking into the fileio code you'll see, that gdb has a
> > couple of functions which transform all protocol datatypes to host
> > datatypes and all protocol values to host values and vice versa.
> > This is done that way to be totally independent from other sources of
> > definition (especially machine dependent definitions).
> > 
> > It's *expected* that the gdb plugin on the target side is doing the
> > same.
> 
> Sure.  But how big are they on the wire?  I think that's what Andrew
> was asking to be clarified.

...which is written into the document in the chapter "Integral datatypes"
which I mistakenly referenced as "B.1" as it was in my original document
I've send months ago on the gdb ML.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Developer
Red Hat, Inc.
mailto:vinschen at redhat dot com


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