This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH GCC]Add 'force-dwarf-lexical-blocks' command line option


On May 7, 2014, at 2:32 AM, Herman, Andrei <Andrei_Herman@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> However, code coverage tools that process the DWARF debug information to
> implement block/path coverage need more complete lexical block information. 

So, it would be nice to give a hint in the actual documentation, why a user might use the flag, or for a maintainer to be able to predict exactly what was desired in some obscure corner of dwarf semantics given the documentation.  I think it can be as simple as “This option is useful for code coverage tools that utilize the dwarf debug information.”  A user, upon seeing that, would then ask, do I have such a tool, say no, and then know they don’t have to contemplate the goodness of the option further.  If one is writing a coverage tool, upon seeing the documentation, they might then ask themselves, how might I use that flag profitably for my users.

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