This is the mail archive of the
gdb-prs@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: symtab/1643: gdb
- From: mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
- To: jimb at redhat dot com
- Cc: gdb-prs at sources dot redhat dot com,
- Date: 14 May 2004 10:28:01 -0000
- Subject: Re: symtab/1643: gdb
- Reply-to: mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
The following reply was made to PR symtab/1643; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
To: diegoandresalvarez@gmx.net, gdb-gnats@sources.redhat.com,
gdb-prs@sources.redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com,
nobody@sources.redhat.com
Cc:
Subject: Re: symtab/1643: gdb
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 06:22:54 -0400 (EDT)
Hello Diego,
You've got an old version of gdb. Can you try gdb 6.1 and see
if it works better?
Here is what I get with gdb 6.1 and gcc 3.4.0 on
native i686-pc-linux-gnu. I'm using the dwarf-2 debug format,
which you are using, also.
Breakpoint 1, norm_inf (A=0xbffff7c0, nf=4, nc=4) at x.c:23
23 return findmax(suma, nc);
(gdb) ptype suma
type = double [2]
(gdb) print suma
$1 = {16, 9}
(gdb) print suma[0]@nc
$2 = {16, 9, 5, 9}
So the data values are correct although the type of suma is still
incorrect. You can work around this with the "@" operator as
Jim B suggested.
The current cvs version of gdb behaves the same way.
(by the way, with gcc 3.4.0 -gstabs+, "ptype suma" returns
"double (*)[0]", which is also wack).
Hope this helps,
Michael C
GDB QA Guy