This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Problems while debugging fortran
- From: Jim Blandy <jimb at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Carlos Eduardo Seo <cseo at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 09:18:14 -0700
- Subject: Re: Problems while debugging fortran
- References: <46FAD136.5030406@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070926214619.GC9403@adacore.com> <471F70C0.3000206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071024193336.GI11797@adacore.com> <20071024195719.GA16009@caradoc.them.org> <471FA810.6080506@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <471FBF9E.5000607@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071024220648.GL11797@adacore.com> <472098B2.5010605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <m3abq7ciu9.fsf@codesourcery.com> <20071025154107.GA13835@caradoc.them.org>
Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false.org> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 08:30:38AM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote:
>> This comment isn't right. The Fortran main program expects to have
>> its arguments passed to it differently than other subroutines or
>> functions; that's what DW_AT_calling_convention is meant to express.
>> The comment should say something like:
>>
>> /* DWARF doesn't provide a way to identify a program's entry point.
>> However, the Fortran main program receives its arguments via a
>> special calling convention; we look for that to recognize the
>> program's entry point. */
>
> Have we concluded that this is true? If so, is there any reason we
> should not make gfortran generate this attribute? And if so, why
> not GNAT or GCJ too?
We've been discussing this on the DWARF committee. That attribute is
definitely not meant to be used to recognize the Fortran main program.
There's a proposal for an attribute that really does what we want, but
it's been sent back for revision.