This is the mail archive of the 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: When to emit C++ debug info?

On Jan 3, 2004, at 8:05 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> > Why not always do #2, and have the linker eliminate the duplicate
> > information?

On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 07:57:21PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> This is of course, the right solution in all but the weirdest cases.
> Unfortunately, making BFD do this is well, non-trivial, to say the 
> least.

No, it's not the right solution, as it explodes the disk space needed for
the .o files as well as the time and memory required for doing the link.
A fast compile-link-debug cycle is critical, and it's been the major failing
of GCC over the years.  At this point, we should be careful to make sure
that we do not make the problem worse.

We can build on the cfront virtual function table heuristic: only emit
debug information for a class in the unit that implements the virtual
function table.  "But someone might give me a library with no debug
information".  Fine, we can have a flag that causes full debug info
to be emitted to cover that case, but it should not be the default.

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