From: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
To: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>, Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Support .debug_aranges in dwarf assembly
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 11:10:08 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87eeaeolu7.fsf@tromey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5100b9c9-0a69-d392-1d45-9affe992acff@polymtl.ca> (Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches's message of "Fri, 27 Aug 2021 13:03:43 -0400")
Simon> But doing it this way makes it so that you can only invoke arange when
Simon> you are in aranges' body, isn't that useful? I guess the downside to
Simon> redefining the proc everytime is performance, but that's really not a
Simon> concern here (it runs quickly enough).
>> To do that, it also have to delete the 'arange' proc after evaluating
>> the body. I suppose that would be alright by me.
Simon> Really? This technique is used in proc rnglists, and that doesn't seem
Simon> to cause a problem.
AFAIK Tcl doesn't have any kind of lexical scoping for procs.
So, after "proc arange" is evaluated, the binding stays around.
This contradicts the what you were saying: "you can only invoke arange
when you are in aranges' body". I think that's not the case, you can
invoke arange any time after any aranges call in the current invocation
of runtest.
I'm not concerned about the performance, I guess. It's just
un-idiomatic to define a proc in a proc, normally this would only be
used for tricky things like changing a proc body at runtime. So when I
see this sort of thing, I start looking for the trick. There's nothing
incorrect, it's just less clear than it could be.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-27 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-26 11:56 Tom de Vries
2021-08-27 13:35 ` Tom Tromey
2021-08-27 14:39 ` Tom de Vries
2021-08-27 15:09 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-27 16:11 ` Keith Seitz
2021-08-27 16:14 ` Tom Tromey
2021-08-27 17:03 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-27 17:10 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2021-08-27 17:23 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-28 15:31 ` Tom de Vries
2021-08-28 20:29 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-28 21:28 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-29 15:31 ` Tom de Vries
2021-08-29 19:54 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-29 21:11 ` Tom de Vries
2021-08-30 8:35 ` Tom de Vries
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87eeaeolu7.fsf@tromey.com \
--to=tom@tromey.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).