Excluding C++ Library Code

Excluding C++ Library Code

[Eric Lemings]

Greetings,

This should probably be listed in a FAQ somewhere but here goes.  How do
I prevent GDB from stepping through/stopping in code (template functions,
inline functions, etc.) contained in standard C++ library header files?

Thanks,
Eric.

Re: Excluding C++ Library Code

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:08:55PM -0700, Eric Lemings wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> This should probably be listed in a FAQ somewhere but here goes.  How do
> I prevent GDB from stepping through/stopping in code (template functions,
> inline functions, etc.) contained in standard C++ library header files?

GDB doesn't support this, unfortunately.

Right now the infrastructure for it isn't there, but someday it will
be.  But how would you indicate to the debugger what constituted
"uninteresting" headers?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

RE: Excluding C++ Library Code

[Dave Korn]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:08:55PM -0700, Eric Lemings wrote:
>> Greetings,
>> 
>> This should probably be listed in a FAQ somewhere but here goes.  How do
>> I prevent GDB from stepping through/stopping in code (template functions,
>> inline functions, etc.) contained in standard C++ library header files?
> 
> GDB doesn't support this, unfortunately.
> 
> Right now the infrastructure for it isn't there, but someday it will
> be.  But how would you indicate to the debugger what constituted
> "uninteresting" headers?


  I'd get the compiler (which already knows about system headers vs. user
headers) to pass down the information in a custom DIE myself.  But then again,
I haven't thought about it in great depth!

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: Excluding C++ Library Code

[Eric Lemings]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz [mailto:drow@false.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:17 PM
> To: Eric Lemings
> Cc: 'gdb@sources.redhat.com'
> Subject: Re: Excluding C++ Library Code
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:08:55PM -0700, Eric Lemings wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > This should probably be listed in a FAQ somewhere but here 
> goes.  How 
> > do I prevent GDB from stepping through/stopping in code (template 
> > functions, inline functions, etc.) contained in standard 
> C++ library 
> > header files?
> 
> GDB doesn't support this, unfortunately.
> 
> Right now the infrastructure for it isn't there, but someday 
> it will be.  But how would you indicate to the debugger what 
> constituted "uninteresting" headers?

I figure the responsibility for this would probably reside more
with the compiler than the debugger (e.g. -gnostdinc++) but I
as hoping it could be done already.

Eric.

Re: Excluding C++ Library Code

[Mike Stump]

On Jan 18, 2006, at 12:22 PM, Eric Lemings wrote:
>> Right now the infrastructure for it isn't there, but someday
>> it will be.  But how would you indicate to the debugger what
>> constituted "uninteresting" headers?
>
> I figure the responsibility for this would probably reside more
> with the compiler than the debugger (e.g. -gnostdinc++) but I
> as hoping it could be done already.

Either, we can mark the debug information with `system header', or  
gdb can strncmp ("/usr/include") and a few others...  :-)  gcc has a  
slightly easier time know when a header is a system header, but a  
project GUI has a easier time having check boxes for components you  
want to stop in and which ones you don't want to stop in, with system  
headers being just one of the boxes.

Re: Excluding C++ Library Code

['Daniel Jacobowitz']

On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:25:58PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2006, at 12:22 PM, Eric Lemings wrote:
> >>Right now the infrastructure for it isn't there, but someday
> >>it will be.  But how would you indicate to the debugger what
> >>constituted "uninteresting" headers?
> >
> >I figure the responsibility for this would probably reside more
> >with the compiler than the debugger (e.g. -gnostdinc++) but I
> >as hoping it could be done already.
> 
> Either, we can mark the debug information with `system header', or  
> gdb can strncmp ("/usr/include") and a few others...  :-)  gcc has a  
> slightly easier time know when a header is a system header, but a  
> project GUI has a easier time having check boxes for components you  
> want to stop in and which ones you don't want to stop in, with system  
> headers being just one of the boxes.

Right - my point was only that I've thought about it long enough to
know it needed some more thinking about :-)

I definitely agree that the debugger should be doing it, not the
compiler.  It's not appreciably harder here and it makes more sense to
allow the user to just toggle a switch to suddenly step into libstdc++.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery