From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1297 invoked by alias); 9 May 2003 10:56:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32690 invoked from network); 9 May 2003 10:55:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.182) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 May 2003 10:55:47 -0000 Received: from ip216-26-76-27.dsl.du.teleport.com ([216.26.76.27] helo=kanga.local) by sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19E5XW-0007T3-00 for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 09 May 2003 03:55:46 -0700 Received: from localhost (grayscale.local [192.168.1.4]) by kanga.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65CB1158ACE for ; Fri, 9 May 2003 03:56:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Felix Lee Subject: Re: Why GCC/ GDB ignore a normal C statement? To: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <9003-Thu08May2003190252+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> on Thu, 08 May 2003 19:02:53 +0300. Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 10:56:00 -0000 Message-Id: <20030509105645.65CB1158ACE@kanga.local> X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00118.txt.bz2 Perhaps gdb could be a little more informative about nonlinear flow? Not everyone is going to be familiar with what goes on with instruction scheduling. I do know, and it still confuses me sometimes. It doesn't have to be anything complicated, just stuff like: print "(line 11 was optimized away)" if doing "step" goes from line 10 to line 12, there are no machine instructions for line 11, and line 11 isn't just comments. For expert users, this could be reduced to printing a "*" in front of line 12. Or whatever. I'd also find it helpful if gdb somehow marked source lines that were attached to nonconsecutive machine instructions. The idea is to give just a little more information so I don't have to spend energy guessing so much. --