From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4506 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2007 15:41:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 4493 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Oct 2007 15:41:13 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:41:10 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3E079833F; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:41:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8636F9830E; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:41:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1Il4pX-0005zO-GO; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:41:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:15:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: Carlos Eduardo Seo , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Problems while debugging fortran Message-ID: <20071025154107.GA13835@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , Carlos Eduardo Seo , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <46FAD136.5030406@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070926214619.GC9403@adacore.com> <471F70C0.3000206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071024193336.GI11797@adacore.com> <20071024195719.GA16009@caradoc.them.org> <471FA810.6080506@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <471FBF9E.5000607@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071024220648.GL11797@adacore.com> <472098B2.5010605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-10/txt/msg00658.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 08:30:38AM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote: > This comment isn't right. The Fortran main program expects to have > its arguments passed to it differently than other subroutines or > functions; that's what DW_AT_calling_convention is meant to express. > The comment should say something like: > > /* DWARF doesn't provide a way to identify a program's entry point. > However, the Fortran main program receives its arguments via a > special calling convention; we look for that to recognize the > program's entry point. */ Have we concluded that this is true? If so, is there any reason we should not make gfortran generate this attribute? And if so, why not GNAT or GCJ too? The only thing we risk (that I can think of) in treating DW_CC_program as a marker for main is that if the architecture required DW_CC_program to indicate calling convention on a per-function basis we would fail to implement "print main()" correctly. I don't think that matters. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery