Re: RFA: patch to fix multi-breakpoint enable/disable handling of inline functions

[Vladimir Prus <vladimir at codesourcery dot com>]

On Tuesday 27 November 2007 02:22:40 Douglas Evans wrote:
> How about this version?
> 
> Here I use libiberty/hashtab.c to determine function name ambiguity.
> 
> It turns out the bug exists for constructors too.  I.e.
> l->function_name for "Derived" in the gdb.cp/mb-ctor testcase is
> "Derived" for both locations.  I wonder if for this particular
> situation l->function_name should record an "enhanced" name to
> distinguish them.

Hi Doug,
sorry for slow reply. I think this version of patch is fine, but
I don't have the right to approve it.

Speaking about the constructors issue you bring -- right, for
reasons unknown the function name for constructor does not
include parameter types (either in plain text, or mangled).

Storing mangled name would require two bits:

1. Learning how to get than mangled name.
2. Changing expand_line_sal_maybe to cope with this.
Right now, if you set breakpoint at function name, we first
expand locations, and then check that all newly found locations
belong to a function of the same name. So, if you set a breakpoint
on a specific instantiation of template function that is inline,
you'd have breakpoint on all inlined instances of that instantiations,
but not on other instantiations.

Now if we use mangled name of constructor, then setting breakpoint on
constructor by name won't set breakpoint on the other constructor.
It might require some tweaks to get right

- Volodya