On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >I've not yet checked, but are there fundamental reasons why bfd_vma
> >or CORE_ADDR have to be unsigned?
>
> I don't think it will help. I think it will also hinder the situtation
> where BFD/GDB are supporting multiple architectures - one signed and one
> unsigned.
Oh, Andrew's right. Signed CORE_ADDR isn't viable because other
architectures have and assume an unsigned address space.
Because MIPS is a minority?
Actually no. GDB supports pure harvard architectures (non-unified
instruction and data spaces). Such targets have boundary conditions
(where sub address spaces should modulo wrap) that make the MIPS case
look trivial :-)