Re: Memory woes

[Tristan Van Berkom <vantr touchtunes com>]

Ok, about gdb not seeing your single bitfield member;
it's a bug with the debugger... has to be.

> I'd set a breakpoint at line 72. I am stumped to have gdb tell me that
> group->_no_fetch_on_load is 0 at this point!!!

This is probably not the fault of gdb.

uint var:1 = -1; // <-- makes no sense at all.

a single bit unsigned is either 0 or 1; not -1.

I dont think there is a standard behavior for
this. usualy setting an unsigned int to -1 yeilds
INT_MAX or UINT_MAX (I think so ... not shure though)

anyway. the point is that you cant assign -1 to an
unsigned bit. TRUE is almost always defined as `-1'.



Cheers,
		-Tristan


Rico wrote:
> 
> --- Tristan Van Berkom <vantr@touchtunes.com> wrote:
>                <snip for brevity>
> > anyhow... I'm sure you've got enough information to proceed. (pretty cool
> > feature for the C compiler ;D )
> 
> Hi Tristan! First of all, thanks for all the info. However, if there was a hint
> in there regarding my main problem, i.e why at some places gdb doesn't see
> _no_fetch_on_load as a member of the Group whilst it sees the other 2 guint
> members of the struct, well I didn't get it. In the following:
> *****************************************************************************
> static void
> switch_to_group (gpointer callobj, gpointer callarg, gpointer client)
> {
>         Group * group = GROUP (client);
>         gboolean  tmp = group->_no_fetch_on_load;
> 
>         group->_no_fetch_on_load = TRUE;
> 72      if (group->article_qty > 0)
>                 articlelist_set_group (group);
> 
>         group->_no_fetch_on_load = tmp;
> 
> }
> *****************************************************************************
> I'd set a breakpoint at line 72. I am stumped to have gdb tell me that
> group->_no_fetch_on_load is 0 at this point!!!
> Worse, inside articlelist_set_group(), that member simply disappears as far
> as gdb is concerned. But the compiler didn't complain when I dereferenced it.
> 
> If anyone is willing to help me track down this bug, let me know, I'll post
> the patch to Pan-0.13.3.93 that I've got so far and you'll get to try and
> see if the problem replicates itself.
> 
> Thanks.
> Rico.
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-app-devel-list mailing list
> gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list