ping: [gcc patch] libcc1: '@' GDB array operator

[Jeff Law]

On 06/04/2015 08:27 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:00:18 +0200, Jeff Law wrote:
>> But my assertion is that stuff like what you've shown above simply isn't
>> important to handle.   What we need to look at are the common cases and I
>> haven't seen a strong argument that the common cases can't be handled by
>> gdb.
>
> If we target only 99% of cases then sure GDB-side is enough.
>
> Still the GDB side will be more code and IMHO at an inappropriate place.
> I was tought + expect that in GNU world it does not matter where a feature is
> implemented, it is more important to be implemented at the right place.
You're looking to add a lot of generality to this GDB feature, but I'm 
not convinced that generality is ultimately going to be useful.  Thus, 
I'm not sure that a right place exists at all.


jeff