This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Esthetics (or worse?) of Secure Pointers
- To: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot dot org>
- Subject: Re: Esthetics (or worse?) of Secure Pointers
- From: Greg McGary <greg at mcgary dot org>
- Date: 17 Apr 2001 18:00:23 -0700
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zackw at stanford dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, bernecky at acm dot org, gnu at toad dot com
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104171940090.11934-100000@nondot.org>
Chris Lattner <sabre@nondot.org> writes:
> If possible, that definately sounds like the best idea... GDB will still
> need to be enhanced however.
John recommends, and I agree, that we handle BP programs as a
different architecture for gdb. GCC needs to be fixed so that it
doesn't emit debug symbols that type fat pointers as structs, which
they are internal to GCC. GCC can and should handle fat pointers
internally as multi-word structs, but when it comes time to write
the compiled output, it should emit debug symbols that identify
them merely as large, indivisible pointers.
Greg