This is the mail archive of the gdb@sourceware.org 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: Variable values before initialisaton


On 27/11/06, Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com> wrote:

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 09:52:52AM +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote: >> Can you clarify? Certainly, each constructor invocation produces a finite >> number of processor instruction. You can identify the "last" instruction of >> those, and hack gcc to produce file last_instructions_of_ctors.txt and make >> gdb read such file and do the right thing. > > You can have: > > - Initialize part A of structure > - Read part A of structure > - Initialize rest of structure > > You don't want GDB to be unable to display the structure at that read, > do you? So you need to know which bits of it are initialized and which > aren't. And, in some cases, you want to be able to debug a structure > pointer after "new" returns some storage but before the constructor is > invoked. > > I suppose this is doable though: a very interesting project for someone > interested in learning about debug info formats and generation would be > to annotate initializedness somehow. The compiler does know. But it > wouldn't be easy.

I think this is a bit afield from Rob's original question.  In the
code he posted:

    int i = 0;
    int j = 2;
    int k = 3;

the issue isn't initialization.  Rather it's that the scope of k
doesn't include the declarations of i and j, but GCC collapses all
these declarations into one block, so GDB thinks k's scope does
include the first two lines.  If GCC produced DW_AT_start_scope
attributes (p. 61, #11 in DWARF 3), and GDB understood them, then this
would work.


Interesting. Is it that GCC doesn't implement it, or that GDB doesn't understand it, or both? How difficult to you think it would be to implement, because I think it would be quite good to have it right.

Thanks,
Rob


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