From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12303 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2010 09:32:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 12294 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Feb 2010 09:32:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from kuber.nabble.com (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:32:32 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Nfrt1-0008NH-53 for gdb@sourceware.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 01:32:31 -0800 Message-ID: <27560876.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:32:00 -0000 From: mweglicki8208 To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB steping into STL Headers. In-Reply-To: <35CF0705-79F2-4AA2-B863-62D1294E1F1C@apple.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <27535106.post@talk.nabble.com> <27542787.post@talk.nabble.com> <1CF86F7D-0B47-47D7-A6E2-24853D50653D@apple.com> <20100211190921.GA20235@caradoc.them.org> <35CF0705-79F2-4AA2-B863-62D1294E1F1C@apple.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-02/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2 So could explain how should i give my compiler information not to pass those inline calls information? Is it possible? It's quite confusing, getting through simple line, with so many GDB "calls". I'm using older version of gcc actually and i can't change it...( 3.4.5 ). I understand that I'm quite new to the subject, and it has to be irritating to answer same questions all the time...But at least please point me into right direction. Thanks for help. Jim Ingham wrote: > > Hey, cool. Our gdb's been doing that for a couple of years now, glad you > caught up :-D > > Jim > > On Feb 11, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:03:08AM -0800, Jim Ingham wrote: >>> It sounds like the STL code got inlined? Then next would also step >>> in, since gdb doesn't see inlined functions as new frames. >> >> Maybe your GDB doesn't :-P GDB 7.0 does support inlined functions - >> if your compiler outputs correct DWARF, at least. >> >> -- >> Daniel Jacobowitz >> CodeSourcery > > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/GDB-steping-into-STL-Headers.-tp27535106p27560876.html Sent from the Sourceware - gdb list mailing list archive at Nabble.com.