Re: [RFA] Expand "info record"

[Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>]

On Tuesday 20 October 2009 20:44:16, Michael Snyder wrote:
> + ?unsigned long long insn_num;

ULONGEST

> +       (p != NULL) && (p->type != record_end);

Superfluous parens.

> +      printf_filtered (_("Lowest recorded instruction number is %llu.\n"),
> +                      p->u.end.insn_num);

pulongest

> +      /* Display instruction number for last instruction in the log.  */
> +      printf_filtered (_("Highest recorded instruction number is %llu.\n"), 
> +                      record_insn_count ? record_insn_count - 1 : 0);

Why the conditional subtraction?

Given this post inc:
> +  rec->u.end.insn_num = record_insn_count++;

The subtraction looks suspicious.

Could you add a comment to record_insn_num and
record_insn_count's definitions explaining what they are and
how they're different, if it doesn't become obvious?

-- 
Pedro Alves