Re: A simple(?) #pragma question

From: Bob Carragher (bobthedancer_at_yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Feb 14 2001 - 07:40:18 GMT 

Hi Russ,

> First, thanks for attaching such a nicely packaged example of your
> problem!  I readily reproduced it on a Solaris workstation.

You're quite welcome!  I'm glad you had no problems in
reproducing the behavior!

> Unfortunately, I don't think it is a simple fix. But it is a problem
> that should be fixed.
> 
> ( Those who don't want to know more than anyone should know about
> stabs debug info should stop reading here.)
> 
> The problem is that UPS is not using the cross reference stabs records
> that GCC puts out.  This is a stabs record such as the following:
> 
>    .stabs "a:49=xsmyPragmaClass:",N_LSYM,0x0,0x5,0xffffffe8
> 
> The 49=xsmyPragmaClass says that type 49 is a struct (or class) called
> myPragmaClass whose definition is (hopefully) given in some other
> compilation unit, and the debugger should go looking for it based on the name.
> 
> Doing this, without making the time to load a symbol table quadatic or
> worse in the size of the table, is pretty tricky.  If anyone wants
> to tackle this, I'll give what help I can.

Argh, I was afraid that this would be the case.  I'll assume
that this is not feasible at this point, and just set up my
Makefile to allow generation of the #pragma statements only if
I'm not debugging.

Thanks for giving me a peek at what a pain this would be!

				Bob

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 13 2002 - 21:51:33 GMT