Re: [PATCH] Whack some dead code

[Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>]

On Tuesday 30 March 2010 18:05:14, Stan Shebs wrote:
> A better term is maybe "bogus code", and my explanation is misleading.  
> If you look at the locals start_pc and end_pc, you see that the original 
> code's sal.symtab == 0 case does not set them before they get passed to 
> tfind_1 at the bottom.  I suppose one could try to salvage the sal.pc != 
> 0 case and treat it as a start_pc == end_pc situation; we'd would want 
> to think how each case is supposed to be useful.  

Whoops, yeah, there was a bug here.  The intention was certainly for
treating sal.pc != 0 case as start_pc == end_pc.  I don't know how
useful that would be.  The " for address 0x....... <functname>" part
did looks a bit useful, but I won't cry over it being gone.

> It would be a little 
> annoying if a typo in tfind takes you to an unexpected trace frame, 
> which in turn could disable your display commands, etc.

Well, there was an obvious bug.  That remark applies to all bugs.  :-)

> (Incidentally, I notice that "help info line" doesn't mention the raw 
> address option. Didn't it used to??)

(Hmm.  I've tried gdb 5.3 (2002), and it doesn't, the help text
looks the same.  Don't have older builds handy.)

-- 
Pedro Alves