This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [ob] Remove initializations of memset'd structure
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:33:27PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii writes:
> > > From: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
> > > Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:30:06 -0500
> > > > >
> > > > > - MSYMBOL_TYPE (m) = mst_unknown;
> > > >
> > > > This part of the patch seems to assume that mst_unknown has the value
> > > > zero. Should we have such assumptions in the code?
> > >
> > > Yes, in symtab.h mst_unknown is 0.
> >
> > I know that, I looked it up in symtab.h. The question is, should the
> > code rely on the fact that zeroing out the struct causes the
> > MSYMBOL_TYPE member to become mst_unknown. Suppose we change the
> > enumeration some day, that would break the code.
> >
>
> Oh, I see. I misunderstood you.
>
> > So I think a comment is not enough, we should leave that line alone.
> > In general, it is my opinion that code should not assume anything
> > about the numerical values of enumerated types.
>
> That's true. It would be safer to leave the line alone. I'll change
> it back. Also language_unknown is used similarly.
>
> I've committed this.
Thanks. The only downside is that this suggests the type of the
terminating symbol can ever be read without being in error, which is
incorrect; the minimal symbol table's end appears to be marked by
otherwise by SYMBOL_LINKAGE_NAME (msym) == NULL. Other minimal symbols
may have type mst_unknown.
Obviously this can't hurt though.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer