=?utf-8?q?José?= L. Junior <jljunio...@gmail.com>,
=?utf-8?q?José?= L. Junior <jljunio...@gmail.com>,
=?utf-8?q?José?= L. Junior <jljunio...@gmail.com>
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <llvm/llvm-project/pull/67019/l...@github.com>
================
@@ -38,7 +38,18 @@ Status CommandOptionsProcessLaunch::SetOptionValue(
case 's': // Stop at program entry point
launch_info.GetFlags().Set(eLaunchFlagStopAtEntry);
break;
-
+ case 'm': // Stop at main function
+ {
+ TargetSP target_sp =
+ execution_context ? execution_context->GetTargetSP() : TargetSP();
+ BreakpointSP bp_sp = target_sp->CreateBreakpoint(
+ nullptr, nullptr, "main", eFunctionNameTypeAuto, eLanguageTypeUnknown,
----------------
jimingham wrote:
IIUC, we're not trying to break at the actual entry point (that's what
-stop-at-entry-point does) but the main executable's Language entry point. I'm
not sure that is something the platform can know. For all the C-based
languages it was "main", but for some other languages it might be something
else. For Ada apparently it can be anything and you designate it "main" some
other way. In other languages it could just have a different name than
"main"...
If that's true, shouldn't we be asking all the Languages we support what their
"main" function is, not the Platforms. I'm not sure they can know. And for
situations like the Ada one the language would have to be able to figure out
what the main function was by some Ada specific means.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67019
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
