Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>,
	Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>,
	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA/dwarf-2] Fix for the null record problem
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 05:01:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <vt2ekqp6dmj.fsf@zenia.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040414174729.GA612@nevyn.them.org>


Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> > The following C++ code produces Dwarf 2 info where the definition of
> > struct s::t has a DW_AT_specification attribute, but GDB doesn't skip
> > it, and I don't really understand why:
> 
> Did you misread die_is_declaration?
> 
>   return (dwarf2_attr (die, DW_AT_declaration, cu)
>           && ! dwarf2_attr (die, DW_AT_specification, cu));

Yes, I misread it.  That explains a lot.  :)

> I don't even know what that DW_AT_specification test is doing there -
> the idea of a declaration with a specification is pretty peculiar.
> ...
> It's not clear why the specification check is there; the important bit
> was presumably:
>  > !   if (die->has_children)
>  > !   if (die->has_children && ! die_is_declaration (die))
> 
> i.e. the point of the patch was to add the DW_AT_declaration check.

Yeah.  The other place it's used is in checking data members of
structs.  There, too, you shouldn't have declarations with
specifications.  I'll ask Jason if he remembers.

Joel,how about dropping the DW_AT_specification test from
die_is_declaration, and then using it in the new test in your patch?


  reply	other threads:[~2004-04-15  5:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-19 14:01 Joel Brobecker
2004-02-19 21:52 ` Elena Zannoni
2004-02-19 23:29   ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-19 23:37   ` Joel Brobecker
2004-02-26  2:31   ` Joel Brobecker
2004-02-26  3:27     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-26 19:00       ` Joel Brobecker
2004-04-01  1:18   ` Joel Brobecker
2004-04-13  5:26     ` Joel Brobecker
2004-04-14 17:24       ` Jim Blandy
2004-04-14 17:47         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-04-15  5:01           ` Jim Blandy [this message]
2004-04-15 20:43             ` Joel Brobecker
2004-04-16  3:18               ` Joel Brobecker
2004-04-16  3:59                 ` Jim Blandy
2004-04-15  5:33           ` Jim Blandy
2004-02-26 19:49 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-02-26 20:23 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-02-26 21:34 Michael Elizabeth Chastain

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=vt2ekqp6dmj.fsf@zenia.home \
    --to=jimb@redhat.com \
    --cc=brobecker@gnat.com \
    --cc=drow@false.org \
    --cc=ezannoni@redhat.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