This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC]: Patch to support Fortran derived type - Revised
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Wu Zhou <woodzltc at cn dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com, Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de
- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 11:10:50 -0500
- Subject: Re: [RFC]: Patch to support Fortran derived type - Revised
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0511161454200.21051@linux.site> <20051207232541.GB7483@nevyn.them.org> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0512101455050.21855@linux.site>
On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 03:24:29PM +0800, Wu Zhou wrote:
> > > +name : NAME
> > > + { $$ = $1.stoken; }
> > > + ;
> > > +
> >
> > Why not just use name_not_typename instead of adding "name"?
> >
> > Also, the comments in name_not_typename don't apply here; you could
> > also handle exp : exp % NAME_OR_INT as a name. But, I don't think that
> > adds much value. The whole NAME_OR_INT thing seems like overkill.
>
> AFAICT, adding "name" might be a more direct and easier way to handle
> that. I am not sure yet how to handle name_not_typename or NAME_OR_INT,
> but it seems that some more work is needed in either the parsing or
> evaluation phase. What is more, using "name" is the same way as that in
> c and c++ expression parser, which looks to be more consistent.
>
> Does these make sense?
I suppose.
> 2005-12-10 Wu Zhou <woodzltc@cn.ibm.com>
>
> * gdb.fortran/derived-type.f90: New file.
> * .fortran/derived-type.exp: New testcase.
Typo there.
> +++ gdb.fortran/derived-type.f90 16 Nov 2005 06:50:22 -0000
> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> +program main
Please add a copyright notice to all new tests.
Otherwise the code and testcase look fine; Eli had some additional
comments on the texinfo bits.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery