Re: FRAME_ARGS_SKIP

[Jim Blandy <jimb at zwingli dot cygnus dot com>]

Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
> > This field should be zero for almost every architecture. Would anyone
> > mind if I added a postdefault of zero?
> 
> Now that is a US$64 question (rougly AUD$64,000,000).
> 
> The strategy, when converting a macro to multi-arch, has been to 
> preserve existing behavour.  If, pre-multi-arch, not defining a macro 
> caused compiler errors, post- multi-arch it triggered an internal error.

That rule sounds good to me.  We should leave it as is, I guess.

However, on the (ultra-super-top-secret) target I was working on, the
fact that my gdbarch_init function hadn't initialized this field
didn't cause any internal errors until sizeof.exp decided to dump the
architecture.  Shouldn't GDB be validating the arch sometime sooner
than that --- say, as soon as the gdbarch_init function returns?