This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH v1 02/36] Guile extension language: doc additions
- From: ludo at gnu dot org (Ludovic CourtÃs)
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2014 18:42:44 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 02/36] Guile extension language: doc additions
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <52b9da59 dot 64ab440a dot 0b0b dot 7e1c at mx dot google dot com> <83ha9w68av dot fsf at gnu dot org> <87sit4kb1t dot fsf at gnu dot org> <83eh4ow78t dot fsf at gnu dot org> <87k3egez8e dot fsf at gnu dot org> <83y52vvmga dot fsf at gnu dot org>
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> skribis:
>> From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic CourtÃs)
>> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>> Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2014 12:57:21 +0100
>>
>> > What about long double support?
>>
>> Guile doesnât support it out of the box.
>>
>> If needed, it could easily be implemented as an extension: one would use
>> a SMOB to wrap long doubles and pass them to Scheme, and possibly define
>> methods for â+â, â-â, etc. for objects of this type.
>>
>> Of course, this wouldnât be terribly efficient, but thatâs not so
>> important here I think; what matters is that it would allow âlong
>> doubleâ values to be passed around without loss of accuracy.
>>
>> That said, my feeling is that leaving things as is (with long doubles
>> cast to doubles) may prove to be sufficient for most practical uses of
>> GDB.
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> Well, GDB supports long double if the target does, so I thought it
> would be a pity to lose that when working with Guile.
Weâre talking about âmake-valueâ here, which does allow users to create
a âlong doubleâ value, AIUI.
Whatâs lost is that users can only inject in the debuggee values with
the accuracy of a âdoubleâ.
This is a theoretical limitation, but Iâm tempted to think that this is
rarely (if ever) a concern in practice.
How do the Python bindings handle this?
Thanks,
Ludoâ.