From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23464 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2005 21:44:11 -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 23454 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jul 2005 21:44:08 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:44:08 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1DyGAh-0001Io-1v; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:44:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:44:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Alain Magloire Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Failed breakpoint for C++ in gdb Message-ID: <20050728214407.GA4982@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Alain Magloire , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <1578FF984ABAD411AFA5000102C4BB5B11DEF113@NIMBUS> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1578FF984ABAD411AFA5000102C4BB5B11DEF113@NIMBUS> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00268.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 05:39:28PM -0400, Alain Magloire wrote: > > > > > > > > Is the "const char *" vs. "char const *" example consistent in GDB i.e. > > can > > > I assume this and do some mangling on my own to satisfy the pickiness of > > > GDB? > > > > This is not GDB's pickiness. > > Agreed, but for the user, with code source like this foobar(const char *p); > and then having the debugger insisting on only accepting foobar(char const > *p) for breakpoint is ... heu ... bizarre. > > > It is following whatever the compiler has > > specified in debug information. You could still query GDB for the > > overloads in some fashion, I expect, but I don't know for sure. > > > > That may not be possible (the query) for the front-end. Let me ask you > rephrase the question, is this behavior dependent of the type of debug info? > i.e. if I use dwarf-2 vs. stabs++, GDB will not refuse "char const *" I can > work around this if the behavior is consistent. It's completely at the whim of the compiler. Whatever strings the compiler has put in the debug information, those are the ones GDB will use in symbol names. It varies between GCC versions; I believe it also varies between formats. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC