This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Which MI behavior is correct ?
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Nick Roberts <nickrob at snap dot net dot nz>
- Cc: Maxim Grigoriev <maxim at tensilica dot com>, gdb at sourceware dot org, Pete MacLiesh <pmac at tensilica dot com>, Vinay Pandit <vinayp at tensilica dot com>, Shaiju P <shaijup at tensilica dot com>, Marc Gauthier <marc at tensilica dot com>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 23:02:45 -0400
- Subject: Re: Which MI behavior is correct ?
- References: <464E4C4D.9010709@hq.tensilica.com> <17998.24266.849023.454806@kahikatea.snap.net.nz>
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 02:19:54PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote:
> > If it is correct:
> >
> > - Are we supposed to recreate variables each time we enter the
> > function ?
> > - Is this efficient ?
>
> Well the variables themselves are reallocated from the stack, so there's
> a chance that they're not the same variables. At the moment, however
> GDB assumes that they are the same and you don't have to recreate them.
Aren't the variables associated with a particular frame ID? I thought
we'd decided that it was the right thing to take them out of scope.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery