Re: [PATCH/RFC] coffread.c: delete param

[Elena Zannoni <ezannoni at redhat dot com>]

Nick Clifton writes:
 > Hi Elena,
 > 
 > > Based on the discussion in this thread:
 > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-10/msg00405.html
 > >
 > > I don't have a set up to test this, though. It does build, that's
 > > all I can say.
 > 
 > Given Andrew's comment in the code, I would be rather wary of this
 > patch.  Presumably there is some good reason for passing the
 > cs->c_sclass field in the (void *) pointer argument slot, or otherwise
 > Andrew would not have gone to all that trouble of casting it.

Ah, not really. I think he was just compiling with -Werror. It's that
you added that parameter there, several years ago. So I was wondering
if you still had any interest in this code, and had a way of testing it.

 > 
 > > -
 > > - 		/* FIXME: cagney/2001-02-01: The nasty (int) -> (long)
 > > -                   -> (void*) cast is to ensure that that the value of
 > > -                   cs->c_sclass can be correctly stored in a void
 > > -                   pointer in MSYMBOL_INFO.  Better solutions
 > > -                   welcome. */
 > > -		gdb_assert (sizeof (void *) >= sizeof (cs->c_sclass));
 > >  		msym = prim_record_minimal_symbol_and_info
 > > -		  (cs->c_name, tmpaddr, ms_type, (void *) (long) cs->c_sclass,
 > > +		  (cs->c_name, tmpaddr, ms_type, NULL,
 > >  		   sec, NULL, objfile);
 > 
 > 
 > > [Richard, Nick, this does affect arm-coff]
 > 
 > Does it improve things ?  :-)  If so, what ?
 > 

It certainly opens the way for more cleanups.
Is arm-coff still alive and of interest?

elena

 > Cheers
 >         Nick
 >