Re: [RFA] unexpected multiple location for breakpoint

[Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com>]

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 09:29:42AM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> However, I wonder if that makes any difference at all in our case:
> If we have a "contained-in" relationship between two entries, then
> the first of the two entries necessarily has a lower PC than the
> second one.

I don't think that's right.  This is a lexical relationship; it
doesn't imply any relationship at the PC level.  But I'm not sure it's
what you meant, either, since this:

> The one scenario that Doug and I identified which my patch probably
> does not handle well is the following case:
> 
> 
>      block1:
>          block2:
>              .line N
>          end block2
>          .line N
>      end block1

illustrates a counter-example.

I'm a bit confused, though; what sort of example produces this
structure?  Are single-line blocks involved (e.g. "if (a) { x; }" all
on one line)?

I would prefer GDB not make any decisions based on "lowest address";
between inlining, basic block reordering, et cetera, it doesn't mean
much.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery