This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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: gdb code review, pointer madness

From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
To: NZG <ngustavson at emacinc dot com>
Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Jim Blandy <jimb at red-bean dot com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:43:15 -0500
Subject: Re: gdb code review, pointer madness
References: <200601231438.26040.ngustavson@emacinc.com> <200601241557.10320.ngustavson@emacinc.com> <8f2776cb0601241600g4fd54578w10e8f1000b044e26@mail.gmail.com> <200601261017.41108.ngustavson@emacinc.com>

On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 10:17:41AM -0600, NZG wrote:
> So, if frame 0 is actually the lowest level frame, 
> would it be correct to say that 
> 
> for frame->level=0
> frame->this_id->value->stack_addr =0
> 
> for all time?
> Or is this an overgeneralization.

You should try GDB on some other target to see how this works. 
Frame 0 is the innermost (i.e. current) frame.  It unwinds to frame #1.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

Follow-Ups:
- frame theory, was pointer madness
  - From: NZG

References:
- gdb code review, pointer madness
  - From: NZG
- Re: gdb code review, pointer madness
  - From: NZG
- Re: gdb code review, pointer madness
  - From: Jim Blandy
- Re: gdb code review, pointer madness
  - From: NZG

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