Re: Problems with breakpoints in constructors

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 07:58:30PM +0530, Amit S. Kale wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 Jul 2004 12:03 pm, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:24:37 +0530, "Amit S. Kale" <amitkale@linsyssoft.com> 
> wrote:
> > > Mangled names are emitted in debugging information generated in the
> > > function add_name_and_src_coords_attributes. They are emitted as
> > > attribute DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name. This attribute is emitted for all
> > > member functions except for constructors. It's not emitted when
> > > DECL_ABSTRACT is true, which applies to constructors.
> >
> > ...which applies to the abstract instance of constructors.  This should in
> > turn be referenced by two concrete instances, which should have
> > DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name.
> >
> > > This hack generates DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name for only one attribute.
> > > add_name_and_src_coords_attributes is not called for second instance of
> > > the constructor since both these constructors are instance of an abstract
> > > declaration, for which add_name_and_src_coords_attributes has been called
> > > at the time of first instance.
> >
> > That's a bug; since we (correctly) aren't attaching the linkage name to the
> > abstract instance, we need to attach it to the concrete instances.
> 
> I found that the generation of a die for default constructors (any members 
> that have an abstract origin) is suppressed in gen_member_die. I did the 
> change given below and could get DW_TAG_subprogram for both default 
> constructors. The die included DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name attrib also.

Shouldn't the DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name appear with the DIE for the
concrete instance - which is already emitted with the code for the
concrete instance?  They shouldn't be inside the class.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz