https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90017
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
I think it's more of a missing feature than a bug. I believe GDB folks already
know about this, though maybe not about this specific manifestation thereof.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90017
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Qirun Zhang from comment #3)
> (In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #2)
> > This odd behavior is an artifact of the way GCC lays out the basic blocks,
> > and how GDB interprets the line nu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90017
--- Comment #3 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Alexandre Oliva from comment #2)
> This odd behavior is an artifact of the way GCC lays out the basic blocks,
> and how GDB interprets the line number program.
>
> The blocks containing the condit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90017
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva ---
This odd behavior is an artifact of the way GCC lays out the basic blocks, and
how GDB interprets the line number program.
The blocks containing the conditional calls to optimize_me_not in line 15 are
move
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90017
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
CC|
