From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10452 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2002 12:46:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10298 invoked from network); 17 Mar 2002 12:46:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO monkey.daikokuya.demon.co.uk) (158.152.184.26) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Mar 2002 12:46:32 -0000 Received: from neil by monkey.daikokuya.demon.co.uk with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16mXlL-00010d-00; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 10:19:39 +0000 Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 04:46:00 -0000 To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: RFC: C/C++ preprocessor macro support for GDB Message-ID: <20020317101938.GA2636@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> References: <20020317062306.CC96D5E9DE@zwingli.cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020317062306.CC96D5E9DE@zwingli.cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i From: Neil Booth X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00275.txt.bz2 Jim Blandy wrote:- > - Instead of using libcpp, this patch includes a newly-written macro > expander. It seems to work fine, but this is still a bug. But > beware, GDB has some weird requirements: you can't just preprocess > the whole expression at once, and then parse it. (I can explain > that in more detail if anyone is interested; see the comments the > patch adds to c-lang.c.) What are the issues with using libcpp? It would be a good test of its viability as an independent library to have it used somewhere else. Neil.