From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15727 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2003 16:18:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 15714 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2003 16:18:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Mar 2003 16:18:35 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2RGIZQ28287 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:18:35 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2RGIYQ14738 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:18:34 -0500 Received: from cygbert.vinschen.de (vpn50-14.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.14]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2RGIX525267 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:18:33 -0800 Received: (from corinna@localhost) by cygbert.vinschen.de (8.11.6/8.9.3/Linux sendmail 8.9.3) id h2RGIOS18868 for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 17:18:24 +0100 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:18:00 -0000 From: Corinna Vinschen To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Problem with virtual function pointers Message-ID: <20030327161824.GM23762@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20030327142412.GK23762@cygbert.vinschen.de> <20030327145346.GA7253@nevyn.them.org> <20030327152022.GL23762@cygbert.vinschen.de> <20030327152652.GA8010@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030327152652.GA8010@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00374.txt.bz2 On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 10:26:52AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > There's your bug, right on schedule. Look at the line: > addr = unpack_pointer (lookup_pointer_type (builtin_type_void), valaddr); > > Recommend using builtin_type_void_func_ptr instead of > lookup_pointer_type (builtin_type_void). Does that fix it? Yes, it does fix the problem. Thank you! However, I don't understand why it's done this way. The incoming type into this function is already correct AFAICS (well, this time, I didn't get it when I wrote my first posting, apparently). type is a TYPE_CODE_PTR to a TYPE_CODE_METHOD to TYPE_CODE_VOID. So, from my point of view the correct call would just be addr = unpack_pointer (type, valaddr); Why isn't type just used as is? Btw., I've just ran the full c++ testsuite again and using just type shows no regressions (for xstormy16). Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Developer Red Hat, Inc. mailto:vinschen@redhat.com