This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: debugging inline functions
>>>>> "Per" == Per Bothner <email@example.com> writes:
>> Is that OK with everyone?
Per> Isn't that more-or-less the current behaviour (except for
Per> adding the local variable declarations), which is what I was
Per> complaining about?
Perhaps. I wasn't exactly clear.
Per> I think a stack trace displaying the caller's function but
Per> with the inlined callee's line number is quite
Per> counter-intuitive and confusing. I certainly have found it
Per> so in the past.
Now I see what you're saying. I'm not sure I agree, but I see your
Per> Still, that is a user-interface issue - i.e.
Per> a gdb issue. We should make sure the debug output emits
Per> enough information so that the debugger can (in theory)
Per> present the call/inline state clearly. I agree that suggests
Per> emiting the inlined callee's line numbers. But we should
Per> also emit some indication that the function *was* inlined.
Per> Does dwarf2 have a defined way to do this? If so, I'd like
Per> Gcc to emit it. -- --Per Bothner firstname.lastname@example.org
That makes sense. But, it's beyond the scope of what I'm up to, which
is all at the tree level. If the debugging back-ends learn to
represent this, then it will be straightforward to have the tree->rtl
stuff indicate this to the back-ends.
Mark Mitchell email@example.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com