From: Simon Marchi via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>
To: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>, Simon Marchi via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>
Cc: David Blaikie <dblaikie@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Decl/def matching with templates without template parameters in the DW_AT_name
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2023 16:18:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4fd385ad-fa48-7fab-0131-d24ae2db45a9@simark.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pmbgq2s0.fsf@tromey.com>
> The main thing I would want to avoid here is trying to put this extra
> name-construction into the indexer. That will just slow it down -- but
> this is normally the most user-visible slow thing in gdb, and most CUs
> are of no interest anyway.
>
> The downside of this decision is that expansion may expand too many
> CUs. So for example if there are a million instantiation of template X
> and the user types "break X<int>::method", gdb might expand every CU
> referencing X and then still only set one breakpoint.
>
> However if this is an issue I think the solution could be to be more
> selective at expansion time. That is, let the user input "X<int>" match
> X, but then actually examine the DIE tree to decide if this match should
> result in an expansion.
This is my understanding of what you are saying. Save the name without
the template part in the cooked index, but attach to it a data structure
that describes the template parameters. When the user types, let's say,
"b my_class<int, 2>::my_method", "my_class<int, 2>" gets translated to
the name "my_class" plus a description of the concrete arguments (the
type argument "int" and the value argument 2). Then, when checking if a
given CU should expanded, and we have a match for the "my_class" name,
we compare the data structures describing the parameters to the one
describing the arguments, see if it's really a match. Does that sound
right?
I'm just a bit worried that it might be difficult to implement this "is
there a match function", given the complex rules of C++ template
deduction. But maybe it's not so bad, or we already have that logic
somewhere.
Simon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-16 21:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-06 17:37 David Blaikie via Gdb
2023-01-11 18:24 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb
2023-01-11 23:50 ` David Blaikie via Gdb
2023-01-12 1:46 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb
2023-01-14 20:28 ` Tom Tromey
2023-01-16 21:18 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb [this message]
2023-01-18 22:08 ` David Blaikie via Gdb
2023-01-18 22:12 ` David Blaikie via Gdb
2023-01-18 22:01 ` David Blaikie via Gdb
2023-01-12 2:32 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb
2023-01-18 22:04 ` David Blaikie via Gdb
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=4fd385ad-fa48-7fab-0131-d24ae2db45a9@simark.ca \
--to=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=dblaikie@gmail.com \
--cc=simark@simark.ca \
--cc=tom@tromey.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