Re: [PATCH v2] PR gdb/18021 - defend against "static virtual" methods

[Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>]

On 03/20/2015 09:19 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
[snip patch]
> LGTM.

Thank you, Doug, for reviewing my patch. I've now pushed it.

> All of these complaints should provide more info of where to
> find the offending debug info.  Some do, but at the moment it
> is rather adhoc. If we, for example, had a
> dwarf_complaint function that took a CU parameter (or some such)
> and a DIE offset then we could always provide that info without requiring
> every call site of complaint() to write things like:
>
> 		  complaint (&symfile_complaints,
> 			     _("Variable in common block has "
> 			       "DW_AT_data_member_location "
> 			       "- DIE at 0x%x [in module %s]"),
> 			     child_die->offset.sect_off,
> 			     objfile_name (cu->objfile));
>
> dwarf_complaint would add something like the
> " [in DIE at offset ... in module ...]".
>
> Even that's not enough, it doesn't distinguish .debug_info
> vs .debug_types, etc., but I'm not sure that info is always
> available and offset + file should be good enough.

Yeah, that seems like a relatively easy cleanup to do. I'll see if I can 
get to it in the next week or three. I've got a few other things on my 
plate that I need to get into.

Thanks again!
Keith