From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11620 invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2002 13:14:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 11449 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2002 13:14:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO melvin.eunet.fi) (193.66.1.146) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Feb 2002 13:14:03 -0000 Received: from alphatux2.ts.ray.fi (ws-002.ray.fi [193.64.14.2]) by melvin.eunet.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F16D43175 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 15:14:02 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jd@ts.ray.fi) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 05:14:00 -0000 From: Iso-H To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gdb-5.x and step over inline functions Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00283.txt.bz2 On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Iso-H wrote: > > > Is there any way to step over inline functions > > when using gdb >= 5.1 ? Some (commandline or other)option > > perhaps? > > Doesn't `until' do that? That is, given that line 123 calls an inline > function, and line 124 is the one after the inline function returns, you > should be able to say "until 124" and get what you want. Does that work? It isn't same; for example if I want to say: "list f_MyFunction" and if there is (==beginning of "f_MyFunction") some objects which have inline constructors I get list of those constructor(s) NOT list of "f_MyFunction" as I expected/wanted. Besides, I have to check what is the line number from source code by editor because gdb can't show that line to me. Same goes with "next"; if I set breakpoint: "b f_MyFunction" I don't get what I want, because I end up to inside of those f*king inline constructor(s) again when breakpoint is reached! All this works with gdb-5.0, so gdb-5.1.x behaves differently here... > > > I have used gcc option "-g3" with compilations and > > my host/target arch is GNULinux-alpha (ev56/ev67) but > > I think that this "step over inline functions" problem > > exist on other archs too. > > Does it help to use -gstabs+ instead of -g3? (I assume the latter is a > synonym for -gdwarf-2 on your system.) I tried, but it didn't help... > -- Iso-H