Re: [PATCH] Handle DW_TAG_subrange_type

[Elena Zannoni <ezannoni at redhat dot com>]

Joel Brobecker writes:
 > Hello Helena,
 > 
 > > I agree that the subrange type should be handled in more places, so ok
 > > with Joel's calls for that.
 > > 
 > > Almost identical code is in read_array_type. Would it be possible to
 > > unify that as well into a single function read_subrange_type?  I.e. do
 > > you think that that "else if (attr->form == DW_FORM_block1)" clause
 > > will interfere with the ADA case? If not and we can unify them, then,
 > > I'd prefer the version that Andreas has, since it handles the default
 > > high and low, not as -1, but the same as the original code.
 > 
 > Here is a revised patch, which I hope addresses all your comments.
 > Tested on x86-linux, using gcc HEAD. No regression.
 > 
 > I should also mention that I am about to send a patch to gcc-patches,
 > which slightly modifies the dwarf-2 output, and will likely cause GCC
 > to generate more of these subrange_type DIEs. It is more a cleanup
 > patch than anything else, but I did verify that GDB together with the
 > attached patch handle the new GCC without trouble.
 > 
 > 2004-01-14  J. Brobecker  <brobecker@gnat.com>
 > 
 >         * dwarf2read.c (dwarf2_non_const_array_bound_ignored_complaint):
 >         Delete, no longer used.
 >         (read_subrange_type): New function, mostly extracted from
 >         read_array_type().
 >         (read_array_type): Replace extracted code by call to
 >         read_subrange_type().
 >         (dwarf2_get_attr_constant_value): New function.
 >         (scan_partial_symbols): Add handling for DW_TAG_subrange_type.
 >         (add_partial_symbol): Likewise.
 >         (process_die): Likewise.
 >         (new_symbol): Likewise.
 >         (read_type_die): Likewise.
 > 
 > OK to apply?


sure

elena