This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] Re: Regression: field type preservation: 7.0 -> 7.0.1+HEAD
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, gdb at sourceware dot org, Vladimir Prus <vladimir at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:48:05 -0700
- Subject: Re: [patch] Re: Regression: field type preservation: 7.0 -> 7.0.1+HEAD
- References: <20100101184505.GA18391@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201001021308.19130.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20100102203022.GA8372@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100103045717.GZ2788@adacore.com>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:
Joel> In my opinion, I agree with Daniel's comment that it is unusual to
Joel> call check_typedef without storing the function result.
FWIW, we do have a few of these. We should at least comment that this
is called for side effects where this is done, I've tried to do that
with new calls.
Joel> So, my proposal, if the other maintainers agree, is to document
Joel> the side-effect of check_typedef (sets the typedef TYPE_LENGTH)
Joel> as this appears to be a fully-intended behavior, and then do:
This is documented by the TYPE_LENGTH macro, which is how I knew about
it :-). This comment also mentions that allocate_value calls
check_typedef.
Tom