From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2046 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2003 02:17:25 -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 2039 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2003 02:17:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.30.197.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Apr 2003 02:17:25 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465F62B2F; Thu, 24 Apr 2003 22:17:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3EA89AB3.6050403@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 02:17:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Carlton Cc: gdb , Elena Zannoni , Jim Blandy Subject: Re: [rfc] struct dictionary References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00308.txt.bz2 > Blocks currently store symbols in one of three different ways: using a > hash table, using an unsorted list, or using a sorted list. Most > blocks are built by buildsym.c, which use only the former two > mechanisms. Sorted list blocks are only being produced by > mdebugread.c. And, to make matters worse, jv-lang.c produces one > unsorted list block for which the predicate BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT matches; > the chain of events by which GDB actually treats that block correctly > is very tenuous. Um, didn't BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT get deleted? Andrew