This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: setting a breakpoint on a break statement


Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com> writes:

> in some cases, a breakpoint can't be set on a continue or break
> statement.  Here is a simple example:

> The reason is quiet simple: even at -O0 -g, there is no insn (and no
> BB) corresponding to the break/continue statement.
> Here is a small patch which fixes the issue.
> I wonder if this is the right approach.  This patch makes the code
> generated at -O0 uglier...

Thanks for sending the patch.  Procedural note: patches should be sent
to gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, and should have a ChangeLog entry.

I don't think it is appropriate to change the meaning of
forwarder_block_p.  And I'm not sure why you need that patch anyhow,
considering the existing code in cleanup_tree_cfg_1.

Also you should ideally add a test case.

Thanks.

Ian


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]