Re: Smart pointer pretty printers

[Juraj Oršulić <juraj dot orsulic at fer dot hr>]

Hi Jonathan,

Thanks for looking into this! It’s unfortunate that we can't know if the
pointer in the iterator is legal to dereference. Nevertheless, inspecting
smart pointers is a far more common use case, it's good that it has finally
been sorted out.

Thanks, Juraj


On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 at 23:10, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 09/01/18 18:50 +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >On 09/01/18 15:02 +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>On 09/01/18 14:59 +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>>On 04/01/18 11:22 +0100, Juraj Oršulić wrote:
> >>>>Hi Jonathan (and the libstdc++ list). Can we revive this? I sent the
> >>>>patches for improving the smart pointer pretty printers in March. They
> >>>>haven't been reviewed.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for the reminder. I'm testing the attached patch, which has
> >>>been rebased on trunk, but I'm getting test failures for the
> >>>shared_ptr printers.
> >>>
> >>>I can't see any difference between the expected output and what GDB
> >>>prints, so I think it's some DejaGnu or Tcl/Tk oddity. The actual
> >>>printer seems to work OK.
> >>
> >>No, the problem is that I'm just misreading the results.
> >>
> >>I'll finish testing and commit this soon.
> >
> >I changed the code slightly, so it still works for GDB versions older
> >than 7.5, which don't have the fix to allow children() to return a
> >list. There's no easy way to tell if the GDB interpreting the code has
> >the fix or not.
> >
> >Thanks very much for the patches, and sorry for the delay reviewing
> >them.
> >
> >Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
>
> I've just realised I didn't put your name in the ChangeLog, sorry!
> (I semi-automate my changelog entries, so have to remember to do an
> extra step when I'm not the author, or not the sole author).
>
> Fixed with this patch, committed to trunk.
>
>
>
>