From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4435 invoked by alias); 27 Jul 2006 20:12:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 4353 invoked by alias); 27 Jul 2006 20:12:46 -0000 Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 20:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060727201246.4352.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug debug/27574] [4.1/4.2 Regression] MIssing debug info at -O0 for a local variable in a C++ constructor In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "drow at false dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-07/txt/msg02126.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #14 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-27 20:12 ------- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] MIssing debug info at -O0 for a local variable in a C++ constructor On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 05:29:38PM -0000, amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > The problem appeared from r96653 to r96654; AFAICT this is the gcc-patches > posting for the associated patch: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg01709.html Jan and Dan Berlin suggested that the right fix for this bug might be to not register the uncloned constructor with cgraph, only the clones. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27574