Re: dwarflint versus linkage_name attributes

[Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>]

Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com> writes:

>> That [though I am not sure if GDB supports the evaluation of "new t"
>> yet], or "break t::t".
>
> But that's not the name of the function!  
> You can't refer to it that way in C++, can you?

The C++ says at [class.ctor]/1:

    "Constructors do not have names".

At [class.ctor]/2, it goes further saying:

    "Because constructors do not have names, they are never found during
     name lookup;"

So, pedantically, I agree with you that you can never look a constructor
up by saying "t::t" in a C++ program.  Yet practically, when you use the
debugger you may want to be able to break into the constructor of a
given type.

Thus my understanding is that "t::t" in "break t::t" is not the name of
the constructor for C++ lookup purposes, but rather a kind of syntactic
shortcut meaning "the constructors of the type t".

Maybe "break --constructors-of <type>" would have been clearer.

-- 
		Dodji