From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gproxy4-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy4-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.23.142]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C3543857BB4 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 21:34:48 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 7C3543857BB4 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tromey.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tromey.com Received: from cmgw11.mail.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.0.90.126]) by progateway6.mail.pro1.eigbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC72D10047D84 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 21:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id zmHHnSdg2rOQ9zmHHnZGB1; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 21:34:47 +0000 X-Authority-Reason: nr=8 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=CpF6zl0D c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=62a3b8f7 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=JPEYwPQDsx4A:10:nop_rcvd_month_year a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10:endurance_base64_authed_username_1 a=aN7u0-3BVz_BwG8z9-wA:9 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=X7UZpfTgMDX4XLdyJP3YD9lHBHHSN1hujKplCbr/Y4E=; b=UZJVzczC0MpzF/ThebY43rbXna nN1UdRpKXC6isez6OXPScsmjv7A8hVGm7rWwNXtwaXvnz/ofGRdl8fNn0FTcB5O9GiD0J1rcYsqVs uQEoBYkJiIFzRhaZ9x0igLWEp; Received: from 71-211-171-143.hlrn.qwest.net ([71.211.171.143]:35078 helo=prentzel) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1nzmHH-003xSH-7o; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 15:34:47 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Change location_to_sals to a method References: <20220528024231.474534-1-tom@tromey.com> <20220528024231.474534-3-tom@tromey.com> <87a6ax6l75.fsf@tromey.com> <321dffd0-2c41-7c78-a24f-a920ff30afd6@palves.net> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 15:34:46 -0600 In-Reply-To: <321dffd0-2c41-7c78-a24f-a920ff30afd6@palves.net> (Pedro Alves's message of "Wed, 1 Jun 2022 17:38:46 +0100") Message-ID: <87ilp819u1.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sourceware.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 71.211.171.143 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1nzmHH-003xSH-7o X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 71-211-171-143.hlrn.qwest.net (prentzel) [71.211.171.143]:35078 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 7 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3023.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 21:34:50 -0000 Pedro> Maybe we could give -Wshadow another try. I looked into this. I got pretty far along, and it wouldn't be too hard to finish. However, GCC does issue complaints about some conflicts that don't and probably wouldn't ever find real bugs. As simple example is that the 'gdbarch_tdep' function conflicts with 'struct gdbarch_tdep' (or maybe with its purported constructor). There are a surprising number of these because it's common to give the same name to a frame cache struct and corresponding unwinding function. Anyway, I can finish the series if you think it's worthwhile. I started hacking up a compiler patch instead but TBH I doubt I'll finish that. Tom