From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8904 invoked by alias); 8 May 2003 16:07:08 -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 8897 invoked from network); 8 May 2003 16:07:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bilbo.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.18) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 May 2003 16:07:08 -0000 Received: from zaretsky (tony08-234-50.inter.net.il [80.230.234.50] (may be forged)) by bilbo.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.2-GA) with ESMTP id AOF26735; Thu, 8 May 2003 19:06:23 +0300 (IDT) Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 16:07:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: dvenkat@noida.hcltech.com Message-Id: <9003-Thu08May2003190252+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> CC: robertso@somerset.sps.mot.com, delzhao_linux@yahoo.com, "gdb@sources.redhat.com" (dvenkat@noida.hcltech.com) Subject: Re: Why GCC/ GDB ignore a normal C statement? Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00109.txt.bz2 > From: "D.Venkatasubramanian, Noida" > Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:37:27 +0530 > > Debugging with all optimizations can result in abnormal jumps, as is > expected due to instruction scheduling. I find this not a grave problem, although it does take some time to become accustomed to. The benefit is that I always test and debug the same program I'm going to release, and never have to retest due to a different build.