From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 444 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2003 18:30:53 -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 418 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2003 18:30:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Jun 2003 18:30:52 -0000 Received: from dsl093-172-017.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.172.17] helo=nevyn.them.org ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19NzWD-0005Pp-00; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 13:31:21 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19NzVV-000452-00; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 14:30:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 18:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Use of lval_register? Message-ID: <20030605183037.GA15667@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3EDF5520.8030009@redhat.com> <20030605151750.GA25587@nevyn.them.org> <3EDF66A8.4030003@redhat.com> <20030605155851.GA28099@nevyn.them.org> <3EDF6C02.90807@redhat.com> <20030605162338.GB30522@nevyn.them.org> <3EDF827D.6090201@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EDF827D.6090201@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00076.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 01:48:45PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >>>I think it should update the cached copy. I'm not so sure it should > >>>update the in-memory copy, if the var has moved. That would require > >>>re-evaluating the expression that produced $1 wouldn't it? > > > >> > >>Eventually. For the moment I'm just worred about getting it to > >>re-evaluate the registers the value is assumed to reside in. > >> > >>Or should it only modify the history pool (modifying memory is weird > >>here, but where to draw the line is also weird). > > > > > >After some more thought, I suppose it should modify both the pool and > >memory. It's just not clear how to find out where in memory it should > >be, now... > > Or just modify the pool? I'd be pretty surprised by this behavior. I sometimes use values this way, to tweak a member of a struct later. If we're only going to change the copy in the pool then I suspect we should refuse to allow changes at all, if we can't change the program's copy. > varobj provides a mechanism for modifying / tracking values in the target. Hmm. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer