Re: [PATCH 0/3] DWARF type signature lookup fallback.

[Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>]

>>>>> "Dominik" == Dominik Mascherbauer <dominik.mascherbauer@gmail.com> writes:

Dominik> Thanks for the response.  I agree that this series violates rule 2 as you 
Dominik> mentioned.  I was not aware of those rules at the time of implementing
Dominik> this patch.

Totally understandable, since if they are written down anywhere, it's in
some comment "somewhere".

Dominik> My initial idea was to use type signatures as they should be unique even
Dominik> across multiple objfiles.  Based on that I thought it would be possible
Dominik> to use type signatures for finding type units in other not linked 
Dominik> objfiles such as objfiles coming from the JIT compilation interface.

FWIW I think your insight here is correct.

Dominik> I tested opaque types for my use-case, and it did work out.  So, I guess the
Dominik> best option for me is to adapt the generated debug info for opaque types.

I wonder if integrating type signatures into 'struct type' would be
possible.  That is, an opaque type could store its signature.  Then
there'd be a new "quick" API method to look up a full type (which gdb
confusingly calls "transparent") by signature.

This might solve your problem without violating the lifetime rules and
without requiring type GC.

thanks,
Tom