From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id pzX0Fk7nmGLT8QkAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 02 Jun 2022 12:37:34 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4F4881E221; Thu, 2 Jun 2022 12:37:34 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=EtWDMmNI; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5A6E1E01D for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2022 12:37:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EBD538133EC for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2022 16:37:32 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7EBD538133EC DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1654187852; bh=gIP9eq8+dYTOK4N9WQ+WOE6ZMklCG3TUDDxP7d2fKWg=; h=Date:To:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=EtWDMmNIRTxo69WV5xHUgK1Mf+6ftjZDzb282eoZPnU7AEKuzwehRBBJA0LTuhk5V lDO5Npy9813pygOSEwL1Y2FcZRODHHQZfC7KqwP4z/Q8aq5EbSSzzPaOhi0PY3Nbjw HhAUFxiCx+HFhXaSZUgCOgNJlxhKPp5IB5AzLtfg= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2745B3850435 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2022 16:37:14 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 2745B3850435 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34938) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nwnou-0004wI-Tk; Thu, 02 Jun 2022 12:37:13 -0400 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=4862 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nwnoo-00028D-Bi; Thu, 02 Jun 2022 12:37:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2022 19:37:15 +0300 Message-Id: <83leufdnt0.fsf@gnu.org> To: Pedro Alves In-Reply-To: <3b5161b4-9fcb-193b-d5ef-7762eac850f0@palves.net> (message from Pedro Alves on Thu, 2 Jun 2022 14:44:31 +0100) Subject: Re: RTe: Location Specs (Was: [pushed v5] gdb/manual: Introduce location specs) References: <20220526194250.2310460-1-pedro@palves.net> <838rqmm7gb.fsf@gnu.org> <6914f754-4e33-5aa1-4ea6-dca9504e8bfe@palves.net> <83wne0fgmd.fsf@gnu.org> <834k13ffpf.fsf@gnu.org> <5eb11c4f-a35a-79fa-cc67-0428dc88134a@palves.net> <83wndzdy08.fsf@gnu.org> <3b5161b4-9fcb-193b-d5ef-7762eac850f0@palves.net> X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 14:44:31 +0100 > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > From: Pedro Alves > > > OK, how about this instead? > > > > Several @value{GDBN} commands accept arguments that specify a location > > or locations of your program's code. Many times locations are > > specified using a source line number, but they can also be specified > > by a function name, an address, a label, etc. The different > > forms of specifying a location that @value{GDBN} recognizes are > > collectively known as forms of @dfn{location specification}, or > > @dfn{location spec}. This section documents the forms of specifying > > locations that @value{GDBN} recognizes. > > Perfect. > > > > >>>>> For a C@t{++} constructor, the @value{NGCC} compiler generates several > >>>>> -instances of the function body, used in different cases. > >>>>> +instances of the function body, used in different cases, but their > >>>>> +source-level names are identical, unless you qualify them. > >>>> > >>>> What do you mean by "qualify" here? > >>> > >>> The "fully-qualified and prototyped function" part. > >> > >> That's unrelated to what is being alluded to here. > > > > OK, I will drop the "unless you qualify them" part. > > Sounds good. Thanks, I made those changes and pushed.