Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com>
To: Daniel Berlin <dan@cgsoftware.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: macro-expanding expressions in GDB
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 11:52:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <np1yow15qw.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87vgm8b7os.fsf@cgsoftware.com>

Daniel Berlin <dan@cgsoftware.com> writes:
> I've actually already done it, I can post it if you like.
> 
> Macros live in the MACRO_NAMESPACE.
> Each macro's name is it's symbol name.
> The text of the macro is the symbol's value.
> 
> The hardest part was actually getting the macros into the right
> blocks, as you would imagine.

Yeah.  I guess I don't see the point in trying to fit them into the
existing symbol table structure:

- Macros aren't scoped in a block-structured fashion; they have ranges
  of lines over which they're in force.  So the block tree is a total
  misfit for them.

- They don't have addresses or types, so the fields of struct symbol
  are mostly garbage.

- Struct symbol doesn't have anyplace really appropriate to store
  an argument list.

I would want them in a separate structure that can accurately
represent their behavior.

Ideally, given an object code location, I want to be able to find the
definitions that were in force when that object code was emitted.
Unfortunately, we can't do this perfectly; if a file is #included more
than once, perhaps with different #definitions in force each time,
that control #if directives that establish different definitions for
other macros, no debugging format (including Dwarf 2) provides enough
information for us to tell which #inclusion corresponds to which code
address.  Dwarf 2's macro information does it right, but its text
address <-> source location mapping doesn't.

> The callback i'm referring to is the fact that we need cpplib to
> provide a callback when it goes to determine if something is a macro
> or not.  That way, we can look it up in gdb's symbol table instead.  Right
> now, it looks it up in it's internal symbol table.  This will of
> course, never find it.   The other ways around this (not using a
> callback) are so hairy it's not even funny.  There was a discussion
> about it on the gcc list.

Yeah, to be useful to GDB, cpplib's expansion code needs to be
decoupled from the rest of the CPP stuff --- and that includes the
code for #define, which establishes the definitions in the first place.


  reply	other threads:[~2001-06-07 11:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-05-22 14:06 [RFA] linespec.c change to stop "malformed template specification" error Daniel Berlin
2001-06-06 16:09 ` Elena Zannoni
2001-06-06 17:00   ` Fernando Nasser
2001-06-06 21:00   ` Jim Blandy
2001-06-06 22:09     ` Daniel Berlin
2001-06-07  8:40       ` Jim Blandy
2001-06-07  8:47       ` macro-expanding expressions in GDB Jim Blandy
2001-06-07  9:01         ` Daniel Berlin
2001-06-07 11:52           ` Jim Blandy [this message]
2001-06-07 12:04             ` Daniel Berlin
2001-06-07 11:16         ` Stan Shebs
2001-06-06 23:36     ` [RFA] linespec.c change to stop "malformed template specification" error Daniel Berlin
2001-06-07  6:00     ` Fernando Nasser
2001-06-07  9:09       ` Jim Blandy
2001-06-07  7:40     ` Elena Zannoni
     [not found]       ` <nppucg1eq5.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com>
2001-06-07  9:13         ` Daniel Berlin
2001-06-07 11:18           ` Jim Blandy
2001-06-07 11:35             ` Daniel Berlin
2001-06-07 15:22               ` Jim Blandy
2001-06-07 16:40                 ` Daniel Berlin
2001-06-07 10:27         ` Elena Zannoni
2001-06-07 12:30           ` Fernando Nasser
2001-06-07 15:14           ` Jim Blandy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=np1yow15qw.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com \
    --to=jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com \
    --cc=dan@cgsoftware.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox