> Hmm, I thought the convention for this sort of flag was to start with -f, > that -g flags were only for selecting the type and level of debug info. But > I see that there are other debug dialect switches that use -g, so I guess > this is OK.
I kind of prefer -g, but I did notice that it's -fdebug-types-section, so I could go with -f[no-]pubnames (or, as Jakub suggests, -f[no-]debug-pubnames-section). On the other hand, there's -g[no-]record-gcc-switches. What would you prefer? If we change it, should we also change (in a later patch) -gsplit-dwarf (orig. -gfission) to -fsplit-dwarf? >> + if ((TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && !is_class_die (die->die_parent)) > > Why not include public class members? Is the theory that you'll need to > read the type DIE anyway to do anything with the member, so you might as > well read it to look up the member in the first place? There should be a > comment about this. Yes, that's the theory. We're just trying to do the same thing that GDB does when it builds .gdb_index. >> + VEC_safe_push (pubname_entry, gc, pubtype_table, &e); > > Why add enumerators to pubtypes rather than pubnames? They seem more like > variables than types to me. That looks like a typo. It hasn't caused us any trouble because the linker just throws all the names into the same table in .gdb_index, but yes, I think it should go in pubnames_table. -cary
