On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 11:56 PM, David Brownell <davi...@pacbell.net> wrote: > On Sunday 01 November 2009, Ųyvind Harboe wrote: >> > At any rate, upcasting is trivial (return &p->foo_struct) >> > given the current single inheritance, and can't fail. >> >> Actually it can. If I pass an interface pointer to a polymorphic >> routine that operates on that interface, that that implementation >> can not upcast. > > Depends on details of the type model. With what we have now, > it can't fail. > > >> But that's a more general OO problem. I'm all in favor of >> doing this a step at the time and getting rid of the current >> interface cruft and supporting simple interface inheritance >> would be a huge step in the right direction. > > I think we're all in agreement on that one!! Messy... > > I've got the arm9 and armv7m sections of the type tree > cleaned up and sanity tested with target_to_FOO(). When > more is working, I'll post a branch somewhere. > > Later tasks can be making "arm926 is-a target" work; > and restructuring to get a base class for non-M ARMs.
Cleaning up the mess takes priority, but you may want to have a look at the interfac.e I made for disassembly... It works w/arm11 and the other targets which do not share the armv4_5 implementation structure. -- Øyvind Harboe http://www.zylin.com/zy1000.html ARM7 ARM9 ARM11 XScale Cortex JTAG debugger and flash programmer _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
