GCJ and generics

Bryce McKinlay bryce@mckinlay.net.nz
Mon Oct 20 22:26:00 GMT 2003

On Oct 21, 2003, at 6:36 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:

>> Names will only have to be a) unique within each compilation unit
>> and b) descriptive enough to aid debugging. Changing to Java's name
>> mangling would be a logical choice. That would confuse GDB but the
>> new ABI is going to confuse it anyway.
> Not much, I wouldn't think.

The problem I thought of (unrelated to name mangling) was that 
currently in GDB if you have some java object you can examine its 
fields, ie:

print foo.bar

With the new ABI the offset of bar is unknown at compile time and thus 
can't be represented in the traditional debugging data, so GDB won't be 
able to print it. The solution may be to teach GDB about GCJ reflection 



More information about the Java mailing list