From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6762 invoked by alias); 7 May 2013 14:36:08 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 6750 invoked by uid 89); 7 May 2013 14:36:08 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 May 2013 14:35:52 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r47EZpbD023217 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 7 May 2013 10:35:51 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-163.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.163]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r47EZoed024225 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 7 May 2013 10:35:51 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Assert leftover cleanups in TRY_CATCH References: <20130501165750.GA453@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87obcoyot3.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130506181832.GA23882@host2.jankratochvil.net> <878v3symbc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130507014724.GA14170@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 14:36:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20130507014724.GA14170@host2.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Tue, 7 May 2013 03:47:24 +0200") Message-ID: <87mws6vovt.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00230.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Jan> I can't seriously reply these questions anymore. GCC already Jan> requires C++ so why GDB cannot? I do not remember any valid reason Jan> against C++ from all the GDB discussions around it. I was frustrated too, but I'm not the one to convince. Jan> GDB still is barely usable for real C++ application debugging, Jan> debugging multiple virtual class inheritance does not work Could you make sure to file bugs for this? I was surprised to hear there are still bugs here. Tom