Now if there were actual function calls in the initialization, and no records were emitted, I would consider that to be a problem (haven't tested this at the moment though), however, static initializers like that could easily be skipped as a feature in the interest of saving space.
Example : int i = 0; int j = 2; int n = CalculateSomething( j, &i ); int k = 3; I would expect debug records for the initialization of 'n' to be emitted and a break point to properly work on that line... all others I could completely care less for. Heck, if the scope for k (being a primitive type that is initialized with a compile-time constant value) were started before n, i wouldn't even consider that to be a bug... I would consider it a marvel of intelligence in the compiler. - Brian ----- Original Message ---- From: Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Rob Quill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2007 12:32:04 PM Subject: Re: Variable scope debug info On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 02:37:06PM +0100, Rob Quill wrote: > My problem is thus: When using GDB do debug the follow bit of code: > > int i = 0; > int j = 2; > int k = 3; > > If I set a breakpoint at the 3rd line, before int k = 3; has been > executed, and check if k is in scope, I find that it is, when, of > course, it shouldn't be. I emailed the GDB mailing list about this and > was informed that the problem arose because GCC does not emmit and GDB > cannot handle the DW_AT_start_scope attribute (DWARF 3 standard, page > 61, item 11). If adding scope attributes every time more than one variable is declared adds to the already immense bulk of C++ debugging information, I'd prefer to live with the bug myself. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367
