This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RTTI type improvement for
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: xgsa <xgsa at yandex dot ru>
- Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:45:06 -0700
- Subject: Re: RTTI type improvement for
- References: <4ED92C05.9080803@yandex.ru> <m3mxanjiy0.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4EF22A4D.80703@yandex.ru> <20111221193630.GA28985@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4EF30389.5010008@yandex.ru> <20111223200951.GA19581@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4EF5D1C5.5010902@yandex.ru> <20120102022153.GA686@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F07177C.5080201@yandex.ru>
>>>>> "Anton" == xgsa <xgsa@yandex.ru> writes:
Anton> The second part requires this one to be applied, so I'll provide
Anton> it after commit.
It is fine to pipeline patches.
Often it is even preferable to do this, but it depends on how
independent the individual patches actually are.
Anton> +struct value *
Anton> +readjust_indirect_value_type (struct value *value, struct type *enc_type,
Anton> + struct type *original_type,
Anton> + struct value *original_value)
I wonder if there is a cleaner way to do this same thing.
Say, a kind of value constructor as opposed to something that rewrites
an existing value?
If not, that is fine.
Anton> +extern struct value *
Anton> +readjust_indirect_value_type (struct value *value, struct type *enc_type,
Anton> + struct type *original_type,
Anton> + struct value *original_value);
If you're going to split the first line that way, I think you should
indent the subsequent lines by 4 or 5 spaces (not sure what the standard
is, if there is one).
Probably better to split before the open paren though (and still indent;
there are examples of this elsewhere).
Tom