This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: DW_TAG_try_block
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:57:36AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 10:47:03AM -0400, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> > H. J. Lu writes:
> > > Intel C++ compiler generates DW_TAG_try_block for
> > >
> > > try
> > > {
> > > ...
> > > }
> > >
> > > Gdb can't print any local variables declared inside the try block. This
> > > patch seems to work for us. Is that correct?
> > >
> > >
> > > H.J.
> > > ---
> > > 2003-05-26 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
> > >
> > > * dwarf2read.c (process_die): Handle DW_TAG_try_block.
> > >
> > > --- gdb/dwarf2read.c.try 2003-05-26 12:23:22.000000000 -0700
> > > +++ gdb/dwarf2read.c 2003-05-26 12:37:08.000000000 -0700
> > > @@ -1768,6 +1768,7 @@ process_die (struct die_info *die, struc
> > > of a function and make GDB `next' properly over inlined functions. */
> > > break;
> > > case DW_TAG_lexical_block:
> > > + case DW_TAG_try_block:
> > > read_lexical_block_scope (die, objfile, cu_header);
> > > break;
> > > case DW_TAG_class_type:
> >
> >
> > Seems ok, can you address Daniel's concern about the catch block?
> > I.e. add that as well?
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-05/msg00348.html
>
> > How about adding a little test case to the gdb.c++ directory?
> >
>
> I can provide a simple C++ code. But you will need Intel C++ compiler to
> see the problem. Also the current Intel compiler doesn't support RedHat
> 9.
That's good enough - I'd appreciate it if you would post an appropriate
testcase or at least test program.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer