From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11554 invoked by alias); 18 Jan 2013 15:04:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 11545 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jan 2013 15:04:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:04:29 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r0IF4TYX032305 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:04:29 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r0IF4RZO029440 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:04:28 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: fix PR 12707 References: <87r4lno936.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130115172149.GA21127@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87pq13biy8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130117215358.GA18048@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87librbhd6.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130117220437.GA18386@host2.jankratochvil.net> <874niebm24.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130118143457.GA22458@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20130118143457.GA22458@host2.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:34:57 +0100") Message-ID: <87libqa5xg.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2013-01/txt/msg00429.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Jan> On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:30:43 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote: >> It works ok now precisely because the debug symbols don't include this >> information. Here it is without debuginfo: >> >> (gdb) p GDB::even_harder ('a') >> No symbol "GDB" in current context. >> (gdb) p 'int GDB::even_harder' ('a') >> $1 = 97 Jan> This is bad but it is not a regression. Also I find such expression less Jan> essential to GDB than to place a breakpoint there. Again, we are talking about different things. That whole sub-thread was in the context of extending all symbols to have the return type. If we do that, then we will regress some expressions. The status quo is that some symbols have return types and some do not. This causes bugs. My argument is that uniformity is better. Tom