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] |
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 23:32:47 -0400 From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
> I'm afraid I don't understand, and I still don't see your reasoning > against this approach.
It isn't necessary, just like register convertible and register raw/virtual size; .... that go before it, also were not necessary. And now all these years later, GDB is still yet to expunge.
I still don't see how you can get rid of the register convertible stuff. On the i386 I still need it for variables stuffed into the floating point registers.
Until someone does the right think - add support for values scattered across registers and memory - hacks should be confined to architecture specific code.
But even if someone does add support for values scattered across multiple registers and/or memory, we still need the architecture method I proposed. There simply is too much debugging info out there that can't express values being scattered across multiple registers.
And I don't think the hack you proposed is a good idea. I think it's better to add a new architecture method with a clear purpose than abuse an existing mechanism for something that it wasn't quite intended for. Even if the architecture method in question would only be used by a single target.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |