Re: debug/1621: Debugging with complex numbers

[Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>]

The following reply was made to PR debug/1621; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: bangerth@dealii.org, <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,
   <drow@mvista.com>
Subject: Re: debug/1621: Debugging with complex numbers
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:09:46 -0600 (CST)

 > >     Joseph, this report is now almost 2 years old, and versions
 > >     3.0 and 3.1/2 have happened in between. Unfortunately, there
 > >     are no testcases in the report, so I can't check the claims
 > >     myself, but do you know whether the situation has or has
 > >     not improved in the meantime?
 > 
 > The testcase is at the URL given in the report 
 > <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2000-12/msg00536.html>:
 
 Oh, sorry, I seem to have overlooked this. 
 
 
 >         static __complex__ double x = 2.0 + 3.0i;
 >         int main(void)
 >         {
 >           return 0;
 >         }
 > 
 > (gdb) p x
 > $1 = Invalid C/C++ type code 20 in symbol table.
 > (gdb) p x$real
 > No symbol "x$real" in current context.
 > (gdb) p x$imag
 > No symbol "x$imag" in current context.
 
 This is also the behavior I get, using 3.3CVS and gdb5.1.1. For some 
 reason, I cannot get gdb CVS compiled, so can't check whether it works 
 now. The gdb error message indicates that gcc is doing something but gdb 
 isn't understanding it.
 
 Daniel, I'm CC:ing you since you wrote the latest mail I could find on the 
 gdb mailing lists that is about complex value support 
   http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2002-01/msg00359.html
 
 In this you state that you had been fixing some problems. Do you know 
 anything about gdb's present support for complex values?
 
 
 > Some of the problem, if still there, may be a GDB problem, some may be a
 > GCC problem.  But as long as the manual is making claims about what GDB
 > will do in future, the presence of such claims in the manual is a GCC
 > problem unless there's some reason to suppose them to be accurate.
 
 Agreed.
 
 Regards
   Wolfgang
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Wolfgang Bangerth              email:           bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
                                www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth