This is the mail archive of the gdb@sourceware.cygnus.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: Hardware watchpoints



> Instead of adding yet another special flag, we could change
> value_primitive_field, or whoever extracts bitfields, to create a new
> value object

I can try doing that for bitfields, but I don't know what other parts
of GDB might behave in a similar fashion, especially in languages
other than C.

As for the special flag in struct value, I was thinking about walking
the value chain after it is created by evaluate_expression, and
marking all arrays and structs (but not pointers to structs) as being
non-watchable, except if they are at the head of the value chain.  If
this is a good algorithm, then it is easy to implement, and seems to
be safer, since it doesn't interfere with the lazy flag already used
by GDB.  However, it is possible that this seems safer to me because I
still don't feel I understand all the uses of the lazy flag in the
context of value creation and evaluation.

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