From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>,
woodzltc@cn.ibm.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com, fortran@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: The root cause for SEGV in evaluating fortran function call, any solution or suggestion?
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 00:02:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051107000229.GC19200@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vt2oe52npn7.fsf@theseus.home.>
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 11:42:36PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote:
> The types in the debug information should not reflect the extra level
> of indirection; the fact that they're passed by reference is just part
> of the meaning of a Fortran function call. But the location
> expression should encode the extra level of indirection.
This seems perfectly sensible to me. But the example Wu posted earlier
does not agree: today gfortran apparently puts out the indirections
explicitly.
Paul Brook had this to say when I asked him:
When a user says "p foo" they should get the value, not the address of
the argument.
So it sounds like gfortran will need to be fixed.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-07 0:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-22 10:14 [GDB & Fortran] Anyone has success experience with printing the result of Fortran function calls? Wu Zhou
2005-11-02 2:39 ` The root cause for SEGV in evaluating fortran function call, any solution or suggestion? Wu Zhou
2005-11-02 14:53 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-03 3:12 ` Wu Zhou
2005-11-03 21:34 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-11-04 3:15 ` Wu Zhou
2005-11-04 3:52 ` Wu Zhou
2005-11-07 0:09 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-07 4:49 ` Wu Zhou
2005-11-07 5:01 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-07 5:16 ` Wu Zhou
2005-11-10 0:55 ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-10 0:59 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-11 9:59 ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-04 11:20 ` Dave Korn
2005-11-06 23:58 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-02 15:51 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-11-03 2:50 ` Wu Zhou
2005-11-03 7:42 ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-03 10:16 ` Wu Zhou
2005-11-07 0:02 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2005-11-10 0:49 ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-10 1:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
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=20051107000229.GC19200@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@false.org \
--cc=fortran@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jimb@redhat.com \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=woodzltc@cn.ibm.com \
/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).