This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Assuming types for PC
- From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- To: Luis Machado <lgustavo at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, gdb at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 16:45:20 +0200
- Subject: Re: Assuming types for PC
- References: <51B5E06A dot 8020807 at codesourcery dot com> <201306101431 dot r5AEVAfb007850 at glazunov dot sibelius dot xs4all dot nl> <51B5E3D4 dot 9010105 at codesourcery dot com>
> Architectures are free to deal with the types of their PC's as they
> please. Some keep the standard while others don't. I don't have a
> strong opinion here, but i wouldn't call this a bug immediately.
>
> >
> >>If PC should not have a fixed type, i think it would be best to remove
> >>this check.
> >
> >Please don't.
>
> Is there a more elaborate reasoning for not removing this check?
Here is a URL to the original discussion. DanielJ mention that we might
want to loosen up the check, but then added something that confirms
Mark's preference:
http://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-01/msg00699.html
| Might want to loosen the expected type; I don't think every platform
| returns a function type for PC.
|
| Then again, might not want to - everyone should do so :-)
So, I'm guessing that without a compelling reason to change it,
it should stay that way...
--
Joel