[RFA] "constify" parse_exp_1
Keith Seitz
keiths@redhat.com
Sat Mar 9 01:04:00 GMT 2013
On 03/08/2013 05:00 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> This is perfectly fine:
>>
>> for (loc = t->base.loc; loc; loc = loc->next)
>> {
>> - p = tmp_p;
>> + const char *q;
>> +
>> + q = tmp_p;
>> - exp = parse_exp_1 (&p, loc->address,
>> + exp = parse_exp_1 (&q, loc->address,
>> block_for_pc (loc->address), 1);
>> + p = (char *) q;
>>
>> It's perfectly valid, as we know Q on output must point within
>> the object/string TMP_P pointed at on entry.
>> This reads much more intuitively to me, no funny arithmetic, and
>> gets rid of the aliasing issue with the other suggestion, and
>> no new function necessary.
>
> And confirmed this approach is valid.
I have a revision, but after this morning's fiasco, I'm a bit leery of
submitting it until substantial further review. My focus is waxing
quickly right now.
I've also got amendments to address Tom's comments.
Thanks,
Keith
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list