On 05/16/2014 03:00 PM, Agovic, Sanimir wrote:
Indeed, therefore you have to reference a DW_TAG_variable. But
this introduces a type/variable dependency. So a record type maps
to a single variable, you end up with a 1:1 relation for this kind of
types.
The size of the debug information is already an issue, so I guess such
1:1 relations would make things worse. ;-)
Unfortunately gdb only allows constant offsets or constant dwarf expressions.
[...]
... It would work pretty well, actually! I'm not sure if this would
really be the way to go:
It is indeed quite hackish and we should rather add the necessary bits
to gdb.
Agreed.
The problem is that the member offset depend on runtime information similar
to sizeof which needs to be evaluated at runtime if the operand is a vla.
Given the following snippet:
struct foo {int a[n], int b[i];};
&((struct foo *)0)->b;
What value do you expect here? And should the value be different if it is
evaluated at runtime e.g. &f.b - &f.a?
I cannot tell for C, but the corresponding expression is supposed to
raise a Constraint_Error exception in Ada (this is how all null pointer
deferences are supposed to behave).
--
Pierre-Marie de Rodat
_______________________________________________
Dwarf-Discuss mailing list
Dwarf-Discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org
http://lists.dwarfstd.org/listinfo.cgi/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org
