This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [RFC/RFA] gdb extension for Harvard architectures


Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
> Anyway, my point here is that I don't think GCC should be held up as the 
> reference implementation.  Just like in GDB, I suspect GCC has edge 
> cases that no one has thought through.

I completely agree that GDB's behavior is more useful than GCC's.
Having GCC generate a warning message for such expressions, or
(golly!) disable the extension to standard C that allows arithmetic on
function pointers for that ABI, sound much better to me.

The reason I hold up GCC as the reference implementation has nothing
to do with admiration of GCC.  It is because the program the user is
trying to understand was compiled with GCC.
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]