Re: [PATCH 1/3] gdb: Added builtin types for 24 bit integers.

[John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>]

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:09:40AM -0400, Simon Marchi wrote:

     I'm not sure I understand.  I was only talking about the definition of
     the int24_t and uint24_t types, not the handling of DW_EH_PE_udata3.
     From what I read, the C99 standard mandates that the 8, 16, 32 and 64
     variants of the intX_t/uintX_t types exist.  Other types (with other
     values of X) would be extensions.  That's why I thought it would make
     sense to define that in the s12z-specific gdbarches only.  In the end I
     don't really mind, but it just looks like the "clean" way to do it and
     doesn't seem really more difficult.  Can you see if the attached diff
     (applied on top of your series) work for you?
     

Yes, I see no reason why that shouldn't work.  Like you say, C99 et. al.
doesn't require uint24_t but doesn't prohibit it either.  I just
thought, that it makes sense to keep all these type definitions in the
same place so as to avoid the next 24 bit arch having to copy this
definition.   But I don't have a strong opinion either way.

J'