From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Per Bothner To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Harvard proposal Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:27:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <200102102025.f1AKPtS11061@rtl.cygnus.com> <3A970CE6.6B2D2F34@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00338.html Andrew Cagney writes: > A CORE_ADDR is a cannonical address within the target address space. A > CORE_ADDR should, in theory, be able to identify every target byte (or > if someone gets it working - word). To clarify: By "target address space" do you mean the combined address spaces of all the targets put together, or the address space of any single target? In other words, should a CORE_ADDR would also provide some way of identifying a specific sub-space (i.e. specific target)? Or should sub-space identification (which subsumes process id and host network address) be something *separate* from the CORE_ADDR? > However, as with traditional C, I'd suggest following the convention of > CORE_ADDR (void*) for pointers and LONGEST (long) for offsets. Again to clarify: We're talking *target* void*, represented as an integer type in gdb, not a pointer type. -- --Per Bothner per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/