This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfa/arm] Fix some structs.exp failures
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis at chello dot nl>
- Cc: rearnsha at arm dot com, drow at false dot org, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:56:48 +0000
- Subject: Re: [rfa/arm] Fix some structs.exp failures
- Organization: ARM Ltd.
- Reply-to: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
> check_typedef is completely
> undocumented -- no mention in the internals documentation, and not even a
> comment in gdbtypes.[ch].
>
> There is one comment about check_typedef()/CHECK_TYPEDEF() in
> gdbtypes.h. Anyway, Daniels fix is OK. Before you look at a type the
> way arm_use_struct_convention does, you should have called
> check_typedef(), otherwise you'll look at the typedef itself, and not
> its underlying type.
>
I guess if you call a comment on an (apparently) unrelated macro 400 lines
earlier in the file documentation then I was wrong. However, that still
begs a load of questions:
What are the input parameters?
What is returned?
What is it safe to pass?
Can it be called more than once?
Does it operate recursively?
Does it change the input parameter, or is a new object created?
Some of these may be obvious from analysing the source, but that shouldn't
really be necessary.
R.