This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA]: File-I/O patch, Documentation
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 04:49:26PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 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.
Sorry. I was extrapolating from Andrew's answer, and it's been months
since I read it.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer