This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: What about add a interface to output the assembly codes follow inferior execution
For the people that want extend disassemble:
Output assembly codes of next-line is just one part of this idea.
We still have another part:
1. Auto mode, output assembly codes only if there is not line message
for current pc.
0x080483ee 24 b = printf ("a = %d b = %d c = %d\n", a, b, c);
0x080482d8 in printf@plt ()
Current language: auto; currently asm
0x080482d8 <printf@plt+0>: jmp *0x8049670
0x080482de in printf@plt ()
0x080482de <printf@plt+6>: push $0x10
I think maybe is can be default option of gdb. Add it to display with itself?
2. Output assembly codes number limit.
This idea form Doug:
Also, the user might want to set a limit on the number of lines of
If cut short gdb could print "[output cut short due to `set
dissemble-next-line-max 10']" (or some such).
I think maybe it need output something like "This message is cut ...
you can set it with ...".
3. Special for optimized code.
This idea form Doug too:
For debugging optimized code, maybe it'd be nice if gdb determined
there were more (discontiguous) lines of disassembly to display for
the current source line and notified the user (by printing
"discontiguous source line" or some such) before and/or after the
I think maybe is too much thing for disassemble.
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 07:40, Tom Tromey <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> Right, I thought about something that begins with "disassemble", but
>>> didn't want to shoot our completion habits in the foot, since
>>> currently typing just "disas TAB" is all I need to get disassembly.
> Daniel> I agree we don't want to change that binding (I use it all the time).
> Daniel> But is it a problem? ?This would be under set, if I understand right.
> Yeah, this sounds reasonable to me.
> I'd prefer to have some word like "disassemble" in the parameter name.