Re: RFC: partially fix empty DW_OP_piece

[Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>]

On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 22:07:41 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote:
> I think the current gdb model is that a value is a snapshot of some
> inferior state at a particular moment.
> 
> So, for VLA I would say that the bounds ought to be fixed at the time
> the snapshot is taken.  I suppose this would mean introducing some copy
> of the type.

That is interesting idea (and currently in the VLA patch it happens that way).
Still it is probably really needed only for the GDB values history.


> Right now what I've done is change val_print to:
> 
> int
> val_print (struct type *type, const gdb_byte *valaddr, int embedded_offset,
> 	   CORE_ADDR address, struct ui_file *stream, int recurse,
> 	   const struct value *val,
> 	   const struct value_print_options *options,
> 	   const struct language_defn *language)
> 
> That is, I added the new 'val' argument.  This is only used for bit
> validity testing.

As we talked with Tom he has already the patch coded+working.  I thought only
a plan for his coding is being discussed now.  Therefore leaving the VLA
design decision for a later point unrelated to his current patch.


Thanks,
Jan