This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: O0 cleanup_cfg vs debuggability


Olivier Hainque wrote:
 That's actually what I did, which unfortunately doesn't change much because
 no -g also implies no line number notes, whatever the optimize value.

Sorry, I got the two ACT debug problems confused. Yours is the one with the missing break, not the missing type/variable debug info.


So disregard my previous response.

It would be nice if there was a way to distinguish between forwarder blocks emitted by the compiler and ones that represent actual code. Not clear how to do that though, and I'm not sure if it is even possible. Maybe we can keep track of when a block is created, and one created at RTL gen time represents real code, and one created later represents a compiler generated construct. That doesn't seem very elegant though.

A new CLEANUP_* enum would be a reasonable solution once you figure out how to fix this.
--
Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.SpecifixInc.com



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