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]

Re: RFC: Moving disassembler_command to cli land and using newer disassembler code


Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
 > On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 05:52:39PM -0400, Fernando Nasser wrote:
 > > As soon as I can solve the small output differences between what is printed 
 > > by the old code and what the new one prints I will be doing the following 
 > > code migration, removing one more cli command from the library and making 
 > > it use the disassembler code in disasm.c.
 > > 
 > > This will allow us to have an option to have disassembler in mixed source 
 > > and assembler mode in the CLI as well.  But that is for when I come back.
 > > 
 > > The differences in the output are the "+0" in symbolic addresses (which 
 > > I've mentioned in a separate message) and the leading zeros in the numeric 
 > > addresses (see printouts below).  The old code used print_address_numeric() 
 > > and the new code uses ui_out_field_core_addr().  W.r.t. this leading 
 > > zero(s), I am not sure if we should print it or not (I can just update the 
 > > test file).RFC:
 > 
 > > Output with old code:
 > > disassem foostatic
 > > Dump of assembler code for function foostatic:
 > > 0x8048153 <foostatic>:  push   %ebp
 > > 0x8048154 <foostatic+1>:        mov    %esp,%ebp
 > > 0x8048156 <foostatic+3>:        pop    %ebp
 > > 0x8048157 <foostatic+4>:        ret
 > > End of assembler dump.
 > > (gdb) PASS: gdb.asm/asm-source.exp: look at static function
 > > 
 > > Output with new code:
 > > disassem foostatic^M
 > > Dump of assembler code for function foostatic:^M
 > > 0x08048153 <foostatic+0>:       push   %ebp^M
 > > 0x08048154 <foostatic+1>:       mov    %esp,%ebp^M
 > > 0x08048156 <foostatic+3>:       pop    %ebp^M
 > > 0x08048157 <foostatic+4>:       ret    ^M
 > > End of assembler dump.^M
 > > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.asm/asm-source.exp: look at static function
 > 
 > Well, I prefer the new version... it is much clearer.  A little worried
 > about MIPS and 64-bit addresses, which will make this very wide and a
 > little hard to read, but I think we have the appropriate truncation
 > function somewhere?

I agree with Daniel, I like the new output better.

Elena


 > 
 > -- 
 > Daniel Jacobowitz
 > MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


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