This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc, rfa:doco] gdbarch return value
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2003 20:11:11 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch/rfc, rfa:doco] gdbarch return value
- References: <3F7C630B.1040506@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 13:40:27 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
>
> This implements the "return_value" method I proposed earlier this week.
> It replaces USE_STRUCT_CONVENTION, EXTRACT_RETURN_VALUE, and
> STORE_RETURN_VALUE. The implementation is fallout from me fixing the
> ppc64 return code and finding that a single "reurn_value" method lead to
> more robust code.
The doco part is okay with me, but I'd suggest to move this paragraph:
+Given a function with a return-value of type @var{rettype}, return which
+return-value convention that function would use.
right after these two lines:
+@item enum return_value_convention gdbarch_return_value (struct gdbarch *@var{gdbarch}, struct type *@var{valtype}, struct regcache *@var{regcache}, const void *@var{inval}, void *@var{outval})
+@findex gdbarch_return_value
since it describes what the method does, while the rest explains more
about the matter.