fixes for type-punning warnings in GCC 4.1

Alexandre Oliva aoliva@redhat.com
Mon Feb 13 18:58:00 GMT 2006


On Feb  9, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 10:32:48PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Feb  8, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:
>> 
>> > On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 12:48:11AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> >> On Jan 22, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > The output is always a DOUBLEST.  I don't know of any reason why we
>> >> > should enable HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE if we can't printf and scanf them; would
>> >> > this be simpler in that case?  Don't make DOUBLEST something we can't
>> >> > scan or print.
>> >> 
>> >> Sounds good to me.  Ok to install?
>> 
>> > Well, it's not right as-is; you need to look at the other uses of
>> > HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE.
>> 
>> Did.  The other uses of HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE are correct, since they do
>> not assume DOUBLEST is long double and they make no attempts at
>> printing long doubles directly.

> Disagree; did you read the bit of my message that you snipped?
> doublest.c jumps through unnecessary hoops casting to long double and
> back to handle a DOUBLEST if this is defined.

Yep.  It didn't look like those two occurrences were such a big deal.
I don't see why we should refuse to handle long double at all just
because we can't scan them in as such.  But it's not my call, I guess.

>> > Would you mind terribly fixing that, adding a changelog, and leaving
>> > out the tui-data change for now?

>> gdb won't build without the tui-data change.  What's wrong with adding
>> the temporary fix now, such that it builds, until someone with a
>> better understanding can go ahead and re-engineer the data structure
>> correctly?

> Sorry, use -Wno-error if you're in that much of a hurry.  I even
> offered to take care of it for you.  If your fix goes in, it will never
> leave; we have plenty of experience with FIXMEs in GDB to back that up,
> I think.

Ok, I tried changing the type in the struct declaration and that
seems to have worked, so I went ahead and removed the now-redundant
type casts.

Ok to install?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gdb-type-punning-4.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 12346 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/attachments/20060213/ce42c5c9/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------


-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Secretary for FSF Latin America        http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}


More information about the Gdb-patches mailing list