From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17557 invoked by alias); 27 May 2003 15:05:29 -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 17537 invoked from network); 27 May 2003 15:05:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 May 2003 15:05:28 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19Kg1L-0007d9-00; Tue, 27 May 2003 10:05:47 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19Kg0j-0002vi-00; Tue, 27 May 2003 11:05:09 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 15:05:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: "H. J. Lu" Cc: Elena Zannoni , GDB Subject: Re: RFC: DW_TAG_try_block Message-ID: <20030527150508.GA11194@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: "H. J. Lu" , Elena Zannoni , GDB References: <20030526124443.A7502@lucon.org> <16083.31335.661805.9131@localhost.redhat.com> <20030527075736.A22991@lucon.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030527075736.A22991@lucon.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:57:36AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 10:47:03AM -0400, Elena Zannoni wrote: > > H. J. Lu writes: > > > Intel C++ compiler generates DW_TAG_try_block for > > > > > > try > > > { > > > ... > > > } > > > > > > Gdb can't print any local variables declared inside the try block. This > > > patch seems to work for us. Is that correct? > > > > > > > > > H.J. > > > --- > > > 2003-05-26 H.J. Lu > > > > > > * dwarf2read.c (process_die): Handle DW_TAG_try_block. > > > > > > --- gdb/dwarf2read.c.try 2003-05-26 12:23:22.000000000 -0700 > > > +++ gdb/dwarf2read.c 2003-05-26 12:37:08.000000000 -0700 > > > @@ -1768,6 +1768,7 @@ process_die (struct die_info *die, struc > > > of a function and make GDB `next' properly over inlined functions. */ > > > break; > > > case DW_TAG_lexical_block: > > > + case DW_TAG_try_block: > > > read_lexical_block_scope (die, objfile, cu_header); > > > break; > > > case DW_TAG_class_type: > > > > > > Seems ok, can you address Daniel's concern about the catch block? > > I.e. add that as well? > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-05/msg00348.html > > > How about adding a little test case to the gdb.c++ directory? > > > > I can provide a simple C++ code. But you will need Intel C++ compiler to > see the problem. Also the current Intel compiler doesn't support RedHat > 9. That's good enough - I'd appreciate it if you would post an appropriate testcase or at least test program. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer