From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id D3CF9384AB5F; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 21:18:39 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D3CF9384AB5F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org;
	s=default; t=1713820719;
	bh=hKf106xUqPI05sp0I6M4DbaxcZZPeYArNDdeeGz9wVc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=mUnxR6oBx2aUXGliCaLnuMuSnlCbx1GezbUbFOypf3R1XPKcd8yMTcN6LOavegFr4
	 gJEO/Mcj35jgXlwrZfTNC2ugLuDiC7lgJbxdMw4xrBe1Cdi+9/Wn8a6xt+W91MqKsl
	 pQyRVPeZ1EBhLGm0C5ciJHo8x/YdLHTzAWQtuO7A=
From: "dblaikie at gmail dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug symtab/24820] .debug_names has incorrect contents
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 21:18:37 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: symtab
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dblaikie at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tromey at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 15.1
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-24820-4717-x2q1whlS1E@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-24820-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-24820-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D24820

--- Comment #16 from David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #13)
> One last note about the size and whatnot.
>=20
> To my mind, one of the biggest problems with DWARF is
> that it is very difficult to read.  The new scanner,
> which has acceptable-ish performance, was a pretty big
> effort and we're still tracking down the occasional
> data race (since threading was the only way to make it
> really fast).
>=20
> However, this situation seems absurd to me.  DWARF is
> hard to read -- but this is due to decisions made in
> the design, not really anything intrinsic to the problem area.
> That is, DWARF gives us abbrevs and a generically
> hierarchical structure, when really gdb (and IMO debuggers
> in general) wants something different.  In theory this stuff
> can be used for other things, but in practice this approach
> means optimizing for these hypothetical other uses at
> the expense of the 90% use case.
>=20
> So, rather than putting effort into an index, whether it
> be .gdb_index or .debug_names, it would be much better to
> tackle this at the source and make reading cheap and easy.
> (This btw is why I put off .debug_names so long, I just
> had trouble getting myself over the feeling that I was
> working on the wrong end of the problem.)
>=20
> This is partly the idea of CTF, though they went the C-only
> route and also didn't really integrate into gdb very well.

I'd love to subscribe to your newsletter/talk with you more about your idea=
s on
this front - is there any particular forum that'd be preferred/most useful =
to
do that?

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=