From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-173678-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 4202 invoked by alias); 10 Apr 2012 16:43:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 4061 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Apr 2012 16:43:01 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f175.google.com) (209.85.214.175)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 16:42:48 +0000
Received: by obbuo13 with SMTP id uo13so8138134obb.20        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 09:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.26.15 with SMTP id h15mr17343736obg.27.1334076167950; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 09:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.92.168 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 09:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120410163905.GK6148@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
References: <4F7B356E.9080003@google.com>	<CAGWvnymDHXtN1AR9hdrYpV7UVw-rkk5ZiM0kS9DbVLY24xQ-6Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAAiZkiA29bnrEHg3jHyOtmdFo1HewaW-rp3KYOKC+gfEQ1pXzA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFiYyc0wG3ha4B4BgA6g4NPnBG6Pj3iuMZ+_B+3AOgBkKvXpLg@mail.gmail.com>	<4F7C35A3.3080207@codesourcery.com>	<CAFiYyc0knheu7jRBUd5Vtva5Bj7GBypzCQ9BFmFYGXzLcFBYGA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAAkRFZ+4RfHszKh50DW1wKSis0wo3516Hy8626FNpYwgGWdABQ@mail.gmail.com>	<20120410084614.GJ6148@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>	<CAAkRFZKFu234Q7+Rm+DRpDJPe9Rr0jtxh26sZWVVeEE1mCDfwg@mail.gmail.com>	<20120410163905.GK6148@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 16:43:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAAiZkiACxHi24=UkNJu5W3VcE7dWssF-giY6dFyf1XWvC-Oxqg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com>, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>, 	Bernd Schmidt <bernds@codesourcery.com>, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>, 	Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>, gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00355.txt.bz2

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>> What is the root cause of the annoyance? Mixing macros and inline
>> functions does not sound good, but using deeply nested macros do not
>> seem to help the debugging situation either.
>
> That when stepping through code in the debugger you keep enterring/exiting
> these one liner inlines, most of them really should be at least by default
> considered just as normal statements (e.g. glibc heavily uses artificial
> attribute for those, still gdb doesn't hide those by default).

so, this is a good candidate for PR to fill against GDB then?  It
sounds like it would
beneficial not just to GCC but to a broader community.

-- Gaby