From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-42196-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5355 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2001 16:53:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
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
Received: (qmail 5187 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 16:53:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO zwingli.cygnus.com) (208.245.165.35)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Dec 2001 16:53:53 -0000
Received: by zwingli.cygnus.com (Postfix, from userid 442)
	id 140C45E9D8; Tue,  4 Dec 2001 11:55:10 -0500 (EST)
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>,
	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFA/stabs reader] Fix v3 duplicate constructors problem
References: <20011203154836.A28821@nevyn.them.org>
	<wvlsnasdle4.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com>
	<20011203172931.A2512@nevyn.them.org>
	<wvln10zewwg.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com>
	<3C0C0A1F.E9274328@cygnus.com>
	<wvlitbncksk.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com>
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 08:53:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: Jason Merrill's message of Tue, 04 Dec 2001 11:00:11 +0000
Message-ID: <npwv037wnl.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com>
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34
X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00132.txt.bz2


Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> writes:
> Constructors and destructors have traditionally had a special calling
> convention.  Though I suppose that as of v3, we've gone to clones rather
> than extra hidden parameters, so it would be more feasible to allow users
> to call them directly from the debugger.  In any case, it needs some sort
> of special handling.

Wouldn't it be reasonable for GDB to support `new' expressions?