[RFC]: Document patch for F90 derived type support
Daniel Jacobowitz
drow@false.org
Wed Mar 1 04:32:00 GMT 2006
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 09:51:24PM -0500, Wu Zhou wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > > Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:53:10 -0500
> > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> > > Cc: Wu Zhou <woodzltc@cn.ibm.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> > >
> > > Normally we try to honor the type names in debug info.
> >
> > If they make sense, sure. If they don't, I don't think we should
> > blindly follow them.
>
> I did some comparison between g77 and gfortran. In the aspect of the
> compiler-generated DW_TAG_base_type, g77 uses "byte", "word" and "integer"
> for "integer*1", "integer*2" and "integer*4" respectively. And gfortran
> seems to adopt a new mechanism, it uses "int1", "int2" and "int4"
> respectively. So it might also make some sense. At lease the debugger
> user can guess the meaning from these words. :-)
I think they're close enough to display for now; I spoke with Paul
Brook and there shouldn't be any trouble changing them if we want to.
Eli, I agree that it would be reasonable to ignore them; but I don't
think there's any particularly easy way to do it.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list