From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: [rfa] PROBLEMS: document 'constructor breakpoint ignored' bug
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:07:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200306242026.h5OKQThr012996@duracef.shout.net> (raw)
This patch documents the notorious "constructor breakpoints ignored"
problem in the gdb PROBLEMS file.
Okay to apply this to mainline?
Okay to apply this to the 6.0 branch?
Michael C
2003-06-24 Michael Chastain <mec@shout.net>
* PROBLEMS: Document pr gdb/1091 and pr gdb/1193,
the "constructor breakpoints ignored" bug.
Index: PROBLEMS
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/PROBLEMS,v
retrieving revision 1.15
diff -c -3 -r1.15 PROBLEMS
*** PROBLEMS 23 Jun 2003 03:28:13 -0000 1.15
--- PROBLEMS 24 Jun 2003 20:20:53 -0000
***************
*** 3,6 ****
--- 3,21 ----
See also: http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/bugs/
+ gdb/1091: Constructor breakpoints ignored
+ gdb/1193: g++ 3.3 creates multiple constructors: gdb 5.3 can't set breakpoints
+ When gcc 3.x compiles a C++ constructor or C++ destructor, it generates
+ 2 or 3 different versions of the object code. These versions have
+ unique mangled names (they have to, in order for linking to work), but
+ they have identical source code names, which leads to a great deal of
+ confusion. Specifically, if you set a breakpoint in a constructor or a
+ destructor, gdb will put a breakpoint in one of the versions, but your
+ program may execute the other version. This makes it impossible to set
+ breakpoints reliably in constructors or destructors.
+
+ gcc 3.x generates these multiple object code functions in order to
+ implement virtual base classes. gcc 2.x generated just one object code
+ function with a hidden parameter, but gcc 3.x conforms to a multi-vendor
+ ABI for C++ which requires multiple object code functions.
next reply other threads:[~2003-06-24 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-24 21:07 Michael Elizabeth Chastain [this message]
2003-06-25 21:46 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-26 1:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-26 12:49 ` Paul Koning
2003-06-26 13:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-26 16:27 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200306242026.h5OKQThr012996@duracef.shout.net \
--to=mec@shout.net \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox