From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 56499 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2017 15:42:16 -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 56476 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jan 2017 15:42:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LIKELY_SPAM_BODY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=amid, painful, feelings, github X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:42:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30FF38123A; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:42:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.4]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v0CFg6JW022877; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 10:42:06 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC 2/7] Add libiberty/concat styled concat_path function To: Philipp Rudo References: <20170112113217.48852-1-prudo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170112113217.48852-3-prudo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170112143315.338f6cfe@ThinkPad> <38e9621a-20a3-730a-b5bb-6fdcb5cea6b4@redhat.com> <20170112160854.0040376a@ThinkPad> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, peter.griffin@linaro.org, yao.qi@arm.com, arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:42:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170112160854.0040376a@ThinkPad> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-01/txt/msg00233.txt.bz2 On 01/12/2017 03:08 PM, Philipp Rudo wrote: > its quite obvious that you are pro C++. My own feelings are quite > mixed. I must amid that the standard library is quite handy, at least > when it works. Debugging it is quite a pain. There's definitely lots of scope for making C++ debugging less painful. I think 2017 will see good advancements here. For example, with the palves/cp-linespec branch on my github, setting breakpoints in C++ methods is soooooo much easier, mainly because I've made linespec tab completion Just Work. The whole "compile" feature for C++ (making use of g++ for the parsing, via the libcc1 plugin) should be making it upstream this year. Etc. Keep in mind that a significant (if not the largest) chunk of our users is using GDB to debug their C++ code too. So in a sense, any pain we now may feel, a good chunk of our users have been feeling for a long while. We just hadn't been dogfooding. > But the syntax sometimes > is unreadable, especially when you use those teplates containing > templates using types is different namespaces. OTOH, stepping through C code that emulates templates using C #defines OTOH is just plain impossible, since all of it is compiled down to a single source line... So in that sense, I think debugging C++ is better than C here. It also helps if you're using a distro that installs pretty printers for the standard library correctly. Fedora does. Ubuntu didn't use to, but I don't know the current state. Thanks, Pedro Alves