This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA/c++testsuite] New test for constructor breakpoints
- From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec at shout dot net>
- To: drow at mvista dot com
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 13:11:21 -0600
- Subject: Re: [RFA/c++testsuite] New test for constructor breakpoints
Hi Daniel,
> The patch tests _overloaded_ constructors.
Ah, you are right. I saw the choice menu and jumped to an incorrect
conclusion about what you were doing. I'll revisit the patch.
> The bug, however, is with
> _cloned_ constructors. Not the same thing at all. Cloned constructors
> are not user-visible objects; they only differ in that they use
> different offsets into the object based on whether it is a baseclass or
> the principal object.
But the cloned constructor is visible. For instance, suppose Foo is
a virtual base class, and suppose Foo::Foo calls other functions,
and suppose that I set a breakpoint on another function. Then the
not-in-charge version of Foo::Foo is on the stack and it is going to
appear to the user with *some* name.
I would like to show this as Foo::Foo$nic, and I would like the user to
be able to set breakpoints on either Foo::Foo or Foo::Foo$nic or both,
as they see fit.
Michael C