PR debug/47510

[Dodji Seketeli]

Yesterday after discussing this on IRC, Jakub expressed his personal
opinion by saying the patch could go in 4.6.  I mistakenly took it as a
formal approval from the RMs and I committed it.  I should have waited
for an approval by email.  So I have just reverted the patch from 4.6
now.  Sorry for that.

Back to the discussion now :-)

Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:

> On 3/16/2011 1:04 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>
>> Would the RMs (in CC) object to this patch going into 4.6?

> What would be the justification for that?

It's a regression from 4.5, caused by the fix for PR c++/44188.  One of
the observed side effect is that a DW_TAG_typedef DIE can now have
children DIEs.  That is not desirable in itself and makes GDB crash.

> I don't see any evidence that this is a regression

This is because the bug wasn't flagged as a regression.  It is now.

> A bug that affects debugging is never *that* serious compared to (for
> example) silent wrong-code generation.

I agree that fixing silent wrong-code generation bugs is always
paramount.  But I believe that a bug that suddenly leads GDB to a crash
is not something we would want to let happen at this point either.

-- 
		Dodji