Re: [RFC]: Document patch for F90 derived type support

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

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