On Sat, Nov 07 2015, Jeff Law wrote: > Also OK. And please consider using those tests with the C++ compiler > to see if it's suffering from the same problem.
Not really, but there's still an issue. In the C front-end the back-jump's location of an unconditional loop was sometimes set to the token after the loop, particularly after the misleading-indent patch. This does *not* apply to C++. Before the misleading-indent patch the location was usually set to the last line of the loop instead. This may be slightly confusing when the loop body consists of an if-else statement: Breaking on that line then causes a breakpoint hit on every iteration even if the else-path is never executed. This issue does *not* apply to C++ either. But the C++ front-end always sets the location to the "while" or "for" token. This can cause confusion when setting a breakpoint there: When hitting it for the first time, one loop iteration will already have executed. For that issue I included an informal patch in my earlier post. It mimics the C patch and seems to fix the issue: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg00478.html I'll go ahead and prepare a full patch (with test case, ChangeLog, etc.) for this.
