From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13181 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2002 07:45:24 -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 13173 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2002 07:45:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO max.phys.uu.nl) (131.211.32.73) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2002 07:45:22 -0000 Received: from [131.211.32.140] (hst32140.phys.uu.nl [131.211.32.140]) by max.phys.uu.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3/hjm) with ESMTP id JAA312291; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 09:45:19 +0200 (CEST) X-Sender: vndijk@mail.phys.uu.nl Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3D80E862.7000500@ges.redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 00:45:00 -0000 To: Andrew Cagney From: Arjan van Dijk Subject: Re: problem setting displays Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00149.txt.bz2 >That (in a sense) is good news. It eliminates display from the problem. > >I suspect it is a problem in either the fortran (that was fortran right >:-) parser or the code that handes fortran variable scopes. The other >possability is that GDB loaded in additional debug information (gdb does >this when it first hits a breakpoint for an object file) and that made >the expression invalid. Hi, Indeed it was fortran. Just plain g77, applied to a very simple example program, already makes the trouble. This makes me wonder why on earth the two products, gdb and g77, both have a reference to GNU in their name, but cannot collaborate. I find this very annoying. In a reaction to my second attempt to get a reaction on this problem, Petr Sorfa gave me a reference to his project, http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=56720 where he develops a gdb version which can handle Fortran (as long as the compiler gives the right kind of debug info). In his gdb version (RC1), the "print" command does not want to make a reference to a specific subroutine, e.g. the command: print subroutinename::variablename does not (yet) work. Only "print variablename" works. This makes it difficult to follow two variables both named "i" that are both involved in a calculation, but which belong to different subroutines in the same source-file (e.g. one calling the other). Also unfortunate is that this gdb version does not compile on our Dec Alpha, but Petr already gave a suggestion on how to try to solve this problem. On Linux it is a relief to see this version simply eat the Fortran. I would be glad to see this project be embraced by the maintainers of the official gdb distribution. So far debugging Fortran is virtually impossible. I also wonder how the Fortran community debugs its code. I fear that they all fall back on huge amounts of write-statements and that they still live in the stone ages. Are debuggers tools for quiche-eaters? Regards, Arjan Arjan van Dijk Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research Utrecht Faculty of Physics and Astronomy Utrecht University Princetonplein 5 NL - 3584 CC Utrecht The Netherlands phone: +31 30 2532815 fax: +31 30 2543163 e-mail: mailto:A.vanDijk@phys.uu.nl homepage: http://www.phys.uu.nl/~vndijk