* [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports
@ 2021-06-06 18:49 George Barrett
2021-07-28 23:23 ` [PING] " George Barrett
2021-08-10 1:02 ` Simon Marchi
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: George Barrett @ 2021-06-06 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: George Barrett
Before Guile v2.1[1], calls to `scm_make_smob_type' implicitly
added the created class to the exports list of (oop goops); v2.1+ does
not implicitly create bindings in any modules. This means that the GDB
manual subsection documenting exported types is not quite right when
GDB is linked against Guile <v2.1 (types are exported from (oop
goops)) instead of (gdb)) and incorrect when linked against Guile
v2.1+ (types are not bound to any variables at all!).
This commit makes a small change to GDB's smob registration machinery
to make sure registered smobs get exported from the current
module. This will likely cause warnings to the user about conflicting
exports if they load both (gdb) and (oop goops) from a GDB linked
against Guile v2.0, but it shouldn't impact functionality (and seemed
preferable to trying to un-export bindings from (oop goops) if v2.0
was detected).
[1]: This changed with Guile commit
28d0871b553a3959a6c59e2e4caec1c1509f8595
gdb/ChangeLog:
2021-06-07 George Barrett <bob@bob131.so>
* guile/scm-gsmob.c (gdbscm_make_smob_type): Export registered
smob type from the current module.
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2021-06-07 George Barrett <bob@bob131.so>
* gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp (test exports): Add tests to make
sure the smob types currently listed in the GDB manual get
exported from the (gdb) module.
---
gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c b/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
index c623b07d26c..72a96a781c1 100644
--- a/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
+++ b/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
@@ -96,7 +96,8 @@ gdbscm_is_gsmob (SCM scm)
return slot != NULL;
}
-/* Call this to register a smob, instead of scm_make_smob_type. */
+/* Call this to register a smob, instead of scm_make_smob_type.
+ Exports the created smob type from the current module. */
scm_t_bits
gdbscm_make_smob_type (const char *name, size_t size)
@@ -104,6 +105,32 @@ gdbscm_make_smob_type (const char *name, size_t size)
scm_t_bits result = scm_make_smob_type (name, size);
register_gsmob (result);
+
+#if SCM_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && SCM_MINOR_VERSION == 0
+ /* Prior to Guile 2.1.0, smob classes were only exposed via exports
+ from the (oop goops) module. */
+ SCM bound_name = scm_string_append (scm_list_3 (scm_from_latin1_string ("<"),
+ scm_from_latin1_string (name),
+ scm_from_latin1_string (">")));
+ bound_name = scm_string_to_symbol (bound_name);
+ SCM smob_type = scm_public_ref (scm_list_2 (scm_from_latin1_symbol ("oop"),
+ scm_from_latin1_symbol ("goops")),
+ bound_name);
+#elif SCM_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && SCM_MINOR_VERSION == 1 && SCM_MICRO_VERSION == 0
+ /* Guile 2.1.0 doesn't provide any API for looking up smob classes.
+ We could try allocating a fake instance and using scm_class_of,
+ but it's probably not worth the trouble for the sake of a single
+ development release. */
+# error "Unsupported Guile version"
+#else
+ /* Guile 2.1.1 and above provides scm_smob_type_class. */
+ SCM smob_type = scm_smob_type_class (result);
+#endif
+
+ SCM smob_type_name = scm_class_name (smob_type);
+ scm_define (smob_type_name, smob_type);
+ scm_module_export (scm_current_module (), scm_list_1 (smob_type_name));
+
return result;
}
diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
index 90c32df7dda..e309fd2888d 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
@@ -66,3 +66,31 @@ set prop_list [lsort $prop_list]
verbose -log "prop_list: $prop_list"
gdb_test "gu (print (sort (map car (object-properties arch)) (lambda (a b) (string<? (symbol->string a) (symbol->string b)))))" \
"= \\($prop_list\\)" "object-properties"
+
+# Check that smob classes are exported properly
+with_test_prefix "test exports" {
+ # Import (oop goops) for is-a? and <class>
+ gdb_scm_test_silent_cmd "gu (use-modules (oop goops))" "import goops"
+ gdb_test_no_output "gu (define-syntax-rule (gdb-exports-class? x) (is-a? (@ (gdb) x) <class>))"
+
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:arch>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:block>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:block-symbols-iterator>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:breakpoint>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:command>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:exception>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:frame>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:iterator>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:lazy-string>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:objfile>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:parameter>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:pretty-printer>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:pretty-printer-worker>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:progspace>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:symbol>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:symtab>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:sal>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:type>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:field>))" "= #t"
+ gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:value>))" "= #t"
+}
--
2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PING] [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports
2021-06-06 18:49 [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports George Barrett
@ 2021-07-28 23:23 ` George Barrett
2021-08-09 22:19 ` [PING**2] " George Barrett
2021-08-10 1:02 ` Simon Marchi
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: George Barrett @ 2021-07-28 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Pinging for review. If it looks okay, I'd appreciate if someone could push it
on my behalf.
On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 04:49:58AM +1000, George Barrett wrote:
> Before Guile v2.1[1], calls to `scm_make_smob_type' implicitly
> added the created class to the exports list of (oop goops); v2.1+ does
> not implicitly create bindings in any modules. This means that the GDB
> manual subsection documenting exported types is not quite right when
> GDB is linked against Guile <v2.1 (types are exported from (oop
> goops)) instead of (gdb)) and incorrect when linked against Guile
> v2.1+ (types are not bound to any variables at all!).
>
> This commit makes a small change to GDB's smob registration machinery
> to make sure registered smobs get exported from the current
> module. This will likely cause warnings to the user about conflicting
> exports if they load both (gdb) and (oop goops) from a GDB linked
> against Guile v2.0, but it shouldn't impact functionality (and seemed
> preferable to trying to un-export bindings from (oop goops) if v2.0
> was detected).
>
> [1]: This changed with Guile commit
> 28d0871b553a3959a6c59e2e4caec1c1509f8595
>
> gdb/ChangeLog:
>
> 2021-06-07 George Barrett <bob@bob131.so>
>
> * guile/scm-gsmob.c (gdbscm_make_smob_type): Export registered
> smob type from the current module.
>
> gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> 2021-06-07 George Barrett <bob@bob131.so>
>
> * gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp (test exports): Add tests to make
> sure the smob types currently listed in the GDB manual get
> exported from the (gdb) module.
> ---
> gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c b/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
> index c623b07d26c..72a96a781c1 100644
> --- a/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
> +++ b/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
> @@ -96,7 +96,8 @@ gdbscm_is_gsmob (SCM scm)
> return slot != NULL;
> }
>
> -/* Call this to register a smob, instead of scm_make_smob_type. */
> +/* Call this to register a smob, instead of scm_make_smob_type.
> + Exports the created smob type from the current module. */
>
> scm_t_bits
> gdbscm_make_smob_type (const char *name, size_t size)
> @@ -104,6 +105,32 @@ gdbscm_make_smob_type (const char *name, size_t size)
> scm_t_bits result = scm_make_smob_type (name, size);
>
> register_gsmob (result);
> +
> +#if SCM_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && SCM_MINOR_VERSION == 0
> + /* Prior to Guile 2.1.0, smob classes were only exposed via exports
> + from the (oop goops) module. */
> + SCM bound_name = scm_string_append (scm_list_3 (scm_from_latin1_string ("<"),
> + scm_from_latin1_string (name),
> + scm_from_latin1_string (">")));
> + bound_name = scm_string_to_symbol (bound_name);
> + SCM smob_type = scm_public_ref (scm_list_2 (scm_from_latin1_symbol ("oop"),
> + scm_from_latin1_symbol ("goops")),
> + bound_name);
> +#elif SCM_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && SCM_MINOR_VERSION == 1 && SCM_MICRO_VERSION == 0
> + /* Guile 2.1.0 doesn't provide any API for looking up smob classes.
> + We could try allocating a fake instance and using scm_class_of,
> + but it's probably not worth the trouble for the sake of a single
> + development release. */
> +# error "Unsupported Guile version"
> +#else
> + /* Guile 2.1.1 and above provides scm_smob_type_class. */
> + SCM smob_type = scm_smob_type_class (result);
> +#endif
> +
> + SCM smob_type_name = scm_class_name (smob_type);
> + scm_define (smob_type_name, smob_type);
> + scm_module_export (scm_current_module (), scm_list_1 (smob_type_name));
> +
> return result;
> }
>
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
> index 90c32df7dda..e309fd2888d 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
> @@ -66,3 +66,31 @@ set prop_list [lsort $prop_list]
> verbose -log "prop_list: $prop_list"
> gdb_test "gu (print (sort (map car (object-properties arch)) (lambda (a b) (string<? (symbol->string a) (symbol->string b)))))" \
> "= \\($prop_list\\)" "object-properties"
> +
> +# Check that smob classes are exported properly
> +with_test_prefix "test exports" {
> + # Import (oop goops) for is-a? and <class>
> + gdb_scm_test_silent_cmd "gu (use-modules (oop goops))" "import goops"
> + gdb_test_no_output "gu (define-syntax-rule (gdb-exports-class? x) (is-a? (@ (gdb) x) <class>))"
> +
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:arch>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:block>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:block-symbols-iterator>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:breakpoint>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:command>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:exception>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:frame>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:iterator>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:lazy-string>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:objfile>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:parameter>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:pretty-printer>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:pretty-printer-worker>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:progspace>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:symbol>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:symtab>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:sal>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:type>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:field>))" "= #t"
> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:value>))" "= #t"
> +}
> --
> 2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PING**2] [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports
2021-07-28 23:23 ` [PING] " George Barrett
@ 2021-08-09 22:19 ` George Barrett
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: George Barrett @ 2021-08-09 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 09:23:21 +1000, George Barrett wrote:
> Pinging for review. If it looks okay, I'd appreciate if someone could push it
> on my behalf.
>
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 04:49:58AM +1000, George Barrett wrote:
>> Before Guile v2.1[1], calls to `scm_make_smob_type' implicitly
>> added the created class to the exports list of (oop goops); v2.1+ does
>> not implicitly create bindings in any modules. This means that the GDB
>> manual subsection documenting exported types is not quite right when
>> GDB is linked against Guile <v2.1 (types are exported from (oop
>> goops)) instead of (gdb)) and incorrect when linked against Guile
>> v2.1+ (types are not bound to any variables at all!).
>>
>> This commit makes a small change to GDB's smob registration machinery
>> to make sure registered smobs get exported from the current
>> module. This will likely cause warnings to the user about conflicting
>> exports if they load both (gdb) and (oop goops) from a GDB linked
>> against Guile v2.0, but it shouldn't impact functionality (and seemed
>> preferable to trying to un-export bindings from (oop goops) if v2.0
>> was detected).
>>
>> [1]: This changed with Guile commit
>> 28d0871b553a3959a6c59e2e4caec1c1509f8595
>>
>> gdb/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2021-06-07 George Barrett <bob@bob131.so>
>>
>> * guile/scm-gsmob.c (gdbscm_make_smob_type): Export registered
>> smob type from the current module.
>>
>> gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2021-06-07 George Barrett <bob@bob131.so>
>>
>> * gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp (test exports): Add tests to make
>> sure the smob types currently listed in the GDB manual get
>> exported from the (gdb) module.
>> ---
>> gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c b/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
>> index c623b07d26c..72a96a781c1 100644
>> --- a/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
>> +++ b/gdb/guile/scm-gsmob.c
>> @@ -96,7 +96,8 @@ gdbscm_is_gsmob (SCM scm)
>> return slot != NULL;
>> }
>>
>> -/* Call this to register a smob, instead of scm_make_smob_type. */
>> +/* Call this to register a smob, instead of scm_make_smob_type.
>> + Exports the created smob type from the current module. */
>>
>> scm_t_bits
>> gdbscm_make_smob_type (const char *name, size_t size)
>> @@ -104,6 +105,32 @@ gdbscm_make_smob_type (const char *name, size_t size)
>> scm_t_bits result = scm_make_smob_type (name, size);
>>
>> register_gsmob (result);
>> +
>> +#if SCM_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && SCM_MINOR_VERSION == 0
>> + /* Prior to Guile 2.1.0, smob classes were only exposed via exports
>> + from the (oop goops) module. */
>> + SCM bound_name = scm_string_append (scm_list_3 (scm_from_latin1_string ("<"),
>> + scm_from_latin1_string (name),
>> + scm_from_latin1_string (">")));
>> + bound_name = scm_string_to_symbol (bound_name);
>> + SCM smob_type = scm_public_ref (scm_list_2 (scm_from_latin1_symbol ("oop"),
>> + scm_from_latin1_symbol ("goops")),
>> + bound_name);
>> +#elif SCM_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && SCM_MINOR_VERSION == 1 && SCM_MICRO_VERSION == 0
>> + /* Guile 2.1.0 doesn't provide any API for looking up smob classes.
>> + We could try allocating a fake instance and using scm_class_of,
>> + but it's probably not worth the trouble for the sake of a single
>> + development release. */
>> +# error "Unsupported Guile version"
>> +#else
>> + /* Guile 2.1.1 and above provides scm_smob_type_class. */
>> + SCM smob_type = scm_smob_type_class (result);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> + SCM smob_type_name = scm_class_name (smob_type);
>> + scm_define (smob_type_name, smob_type);
>> + scm_module_export (scm_current_module (), scm_list_1 (smob_type_name));
>> +
>> return result;
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
>> index 90c32df7dda..e309fd2888d 100644
>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.guile/scm-gsmob.exp
>> @@ -66,3 +66,31 @@ set prop_list [lsort $prop_list]
>> verbose -log "prop_list: $prop_list"
>> gdb_test "gu (print (sort (map car (object-properties arch)) (lambda (a b) (string<? (symbol->string a) (symbol->string b)))))" \
>> "= \\($prop_list\\)" "object-properties"
>> +
>> +# Check that smob classes are exported properly
>> +with_test_prefix "test exports" {
>> + # Import (oop goops) for is-a? and <class>
>> + gdb_scm_test_silent_cmd "gu (use-modules (oop goops))" "import goops"
>> + gdb_test_no_output "gu (define-syntax-rule (gdb-exports-class? x) (is-a? (@ (gdb) x) <class>))"
>> +
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:arch>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:block>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:block-symbols-iterator>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:breakpoint>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:command>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:exception>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:frame>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:iterator>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:lazy-string>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:objfile>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:parameter>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:pretty-printer>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:pretty-printer-worker>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:progspace>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:symbol>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:symtab>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:sal>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:type>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:field>))" "= #t"
>> + gdb_test "gu (print (gdb-exports-class? <gdb:value>))" "= #t"
>> +}
>> --
>> 2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports
2021-06-06 18:49 [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports George Barrett
2021-07-28 23:23 ` [PING] " George Barrett
@ 2021-08-10 1:02 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-10 3:04 ` George Barrett
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Simon Marchi @ 2021-08-10 1:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: George Barrett, gdb-patches
On 2021-06-06 2:49 p.m., George Barrett via Gdb-patches wrote:
> Before Guile v2.1[1], calls to `scm_make_smob_type' implicitly
> added the created class to the exports list of (oop goops); v2.1+ does
> not implicitly create bindings in any modules. This means that the GDB
> manual subsection documenting exported types is not quite right when
> GDB is linked against Guile <v2.1 (types are exported from (oop
> goops)) instead of (gdb)) and incorrect when linked against Guile
> v2.1+ (types are not bound to any variables at all!).
>
> This commit makes a small change to GDB's smob registration machinery
> to make sure registered smobs get exported from the current
> module. This will likely cause warnings to the user about conflicting
> exports if they load both (gdb) and (oop goops) from a GDB linked
> against Guile v2.0, but it shouldn't impact functionality (and seemed
> preferable to trying to un-export bindings from (oop goops) if v2.0
> was detected).
>
> [1]: This changed with Guile commit
> 28d0871b553a3959a6c59e2e4caec1c1509f8595
Since nobody reviewed this, I'll go ahead. I won't pretend that I am
able to verify everything you claim above, but I trust that you know
what you are talking about :). I didn't understand though from your
explanation what consequence the bad behavior has. What did it prevent
a Guile user to do?
I'm fine with you merging the patch. If some other Guile-knowledgeable
person would like to take a look (even after it is merged), they are
more than welcome to.
Simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports
2021-08-10 1:02 ` Simon Marchi
@ 2021-08-10 3:04 ` George Barrett
2021-08-10 3:21 ` Simon Marchi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: George Barrett @ 2021-08-10 3:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simon Marchi; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 11:02:00 +1000, Simon Marchi wrote:
> I didn't understand though from your explanation what consequence the
> bad behavior has. What did it prevent a Guile user to do?
Ah, sorry. There is a range of cases in which it's necessary or
convenient to be able to refer to a GDB smob type, for instance:
- Pattern matching based on the type of a value.
- Defining GOOPS methods handling values from GDB (GOOPS methods
typically use dynamic dispatch based on the types of the arguments).
- Type-checking assertions when applying some defensive programming on
an interface.
- Generally any other situation one might encounter in a dynamically
typed language that might need some introspection.
If you're more familiar with Python, it would be quite similar to being
unable to refer to the classes exported from the GDB module (which is to
say: not crippling for the most part, but makes certain tasks more
difficult than necessary).
Should I resubmit the patch with something like the above explanation
included in the commit message?
> I'm fine with you merging the patch.
Great! Assuming the answer to the above question is 'no', would you mind
pushing it on my behalf?
> If some other Guile-knowledgeable person would like to take a look
> (even after it is merged), they are more than welcome to.
>
> Simon
Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports
2021-08-10 3:04 ` George Barrett
@ 2021-08-10 3:21 ` Simon Marchi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Simon Marchi @ 2021-08-10 3:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: George Barrett; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 2021-08-09 11:04 p.m., George Barrett wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 11:02:00 +1000, Simon Marchi wrote:
>> I didn't understand though from your explanation what consequence the
>> bad behavior has. What did it prevent a Guile user to do?
>
> Ah, sorry. There is a range of cases in which it's necessary or
> convenient to be able to refer to a GDB smob type, for instance:
> - Pattern matching based on the type of a value.
> - Defining GOOPS methods handling values from GDB (GOOPS methods
> typically use dynamic dispatch based on the types of the arguments).
> - Type-checking assertions when applying some defensive programming on
> an interface.
> - Generally any other situation one might encounter in a dynamically
> typed language that might need some introspection.
>
> If you're more familiar with Python, it would be quite similar to being
> unable to refer to the classes exported from the GDB module (which is to
> say: not crippling for the most part, but makes certain tasks more
> difficult than necessary).
>
> Should I resubmit the patch with something like the above explanation
> included in the commit message?
>
>> I'm fine with you merging the patch.
>
> Great! Assuming the answer to the above question is 'no', would you mind
> pushing it on my behalf?
Thanks a lot, done with the extra explanation you gave above added to
the commit message.
Simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-08-10 3:21 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-06-06 18:49 [PATCH v2] guile: fix smob exports George Barrett
2021-07-28 23:23 ` [PING] " George Barrett
2021-08-09 22:19 ` [PING**2] " George Barrett
2021-08-10 1:02 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-10 3:04 ` George Barrett
2021-08-10 3:21 ` Simon Marchi
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).