This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB 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: C++ nested classes, namespaces, structs, and compound statements

> At the moment, GDB doesn't handle C++ namespaces or nested classes
> very well.  I have a general idea of how we could address these
> limitations, which I'd like to put up for shredding M-DEL discussion.
> Let me admit up front that I don't really know C++, so I may be saying
> stupid things.  Please set me straight if you notice something.
> In C, structs are essentially lists of member names, types, and
> locations (offsets from the structure's base address):
>   struct S { int x; char y; struct T t; }
> (Unions are just the same, except that the offsets are all zero.  That
> relationship carries through the entire discussion here, so I'm not
> going to talk about unions any more.)
> If you think about it just right (or just wrong), this is really very
> similar to the set of local variables associated with a compound
> statement:

I'm very interested in hearing about what ACT did for Ada.  As far as I 
know Ada, with its packages has a very similar problem and, 
potentially, working code.


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