From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6394 invoked by alias); 5 Oct 2011 18:04:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 6383 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Oct 2011 18:04:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Oct 2011 18:04:30 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p95I4OV3012613 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 5 Oct 2011 14:04:24 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p95I4Mtc007527; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 14:04:23 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p95I4Ks9007330; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 14:04:20 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Joost van der Sluis Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Pierre Free Pascal Subject: Re: Calling class-methods in pascal (fpc) References: <1316461626.3660.12.camel@feddie.cnoc.lan> Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 18:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1316461626.3660.12.camel@feddie.cnoc.lan> (Joost van der Sluis's message of "Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:47:06 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joost" == Joost van der Sluis writes: I didn't see a response to this. Joost> Now to be able to fix this properly, I need to know what the function of Joost> parse_expression() is compared to evaluate_expression()? To me it looks Joost> like it that parse_expression is not needed at all. parse_expression parses a string and yields an expression object (struct expression). evaluate_expression evaluates a struct expression. Basically you want this split so that you can parse some expressions once, then evaluate them many times. E.g., breakpoint conditions work this way. Tom