This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: status of DWARF2, namespace support on the compiler side
- From: David Carlton <carlton at math dot stanford dot edu>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Cc: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, jason at redhat dot com
- Date: 02 Dec 2002 10:21:56 -0800
- Subject: Re: status of DWARF2, namespace support on the compiler side
- References: <94401D10-0620-11D7-8181-000393575BCC@dberlin.org>
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:05:02 -0500, Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> said:
> On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 01:03 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>> On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 12:54 PM, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-11/msg01661.html
>>> I believe this is blocking the C++ gdb work, or is necessary for
>>> the gdb namespace work, correct?
>> No, David has patches of mine privately to support namespaces and
>> using statements (which Mark doesn't want in because it requires
>> exposing some C++ specific stuff to the common tree stuff. So we
>> won't have using statements until the C++ front end is cleaned up)
>> that he has been using to work on/test gdb namespace support.
Right. The carlton_dictionary_branch of GDB understands namespaces a
lot better than, say, mainline GDB or GDB 5.3 do, and I'm testing that
using a version of Daniel's patch. (I'm also testing it without that
patch: with luck, I'll be able to teach GDB to do a decent job of
deducing the existence of namespaces even without DW_TAG_namespace
entries, though of course there's no way to deduce, say, the existence
of using declarations without explicit debugging info.) I'm not sure
exactly when these changes will start hitting mainline GDB - the data
structures and architecture are still in flux right now, though
they're starting to settle down - but it'll happen soon enough.
>> The only thing those patches don't support is using statements in
>> lexical blocks.
> Correction, the version he has doesn't support using's of overloaded
> functions and some other special cases, IIRC, which I did finish but
> haven't sent to him yet.
The latest version I have from you is a little funny, and misses too
many using directives. For now, though, just having DW_TAG_namespace
is keeping me busy: I'll e-mail you when I could use a patch that
generates more debugging info.
David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu