CORE_ADDR representation

Daniel Jacobowitz dan@codesourcery.com
Thu Feb 18 14:11:00 GMT 2010


On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 09:41:51PM -0800, Stan Shebs wrote:
> I would say to declare that CORE_ADDR is fundamentally 0..memtop, so
> it should be unsigned and zero-extend.
> 
> Can unsigned->signed->diddle->unsigned be encapsulated for MIPS only?

I don't know that it can't.  I think I discussed this with Andrew many
years ago, and he thought that it couldn't; but I can't find the details...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery



More information about the Gdb mailing list