This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Why does C++ support in GDB suck so badly ?
- To: Gianni Mariani <gianni at mariani dot ws>
- Subject: Re: Why does C++ support in GDB suck so badly ?
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2001 02:39:17 -0400
- Cc: gdb at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <3B92D5C0.5050302@mariani.ws>
> It is really bad that you can't examine a simple data structure - because
> of "virtual baseclass botch" or "Value can't be converted to integer
" messages.
>
> Are there alternatives ?
>
> I'm willing to help - but my reseach tells me that's going to be useless:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-03/msg00475.html
Always take any thing you read with a pinch of salt. That includes this
e-mail.
> Is gdb so bad now that it needs to be thrown out and started again -
in C++ ?
Some how, i suspect that would be a bad move. When it comes down to it,
GDB's basic architecture must be ok - it would have to be to last 15 years!
The real problem is that there are a number of C++ bugs, some some of
which are complex - check this mailing list for MichaelC's summary.
I don't think the complexity is comming from gdb's c++ support code,
rather it is comming from changes needed to core core-gdb. It is like
hurding wild cattle through a cattle dip. You can't get all the
required changes through in a single hit, however with a little
organization, some help, and some hard work, you'll soon get things
moving in the right direction.
> Lack of response to my query on August 21st also shows a real lack of
interest
> from the current gdb team so I'm worried.
>
> Will someone on the gdb team please let us know what your plans are
to address
> the lack of C++ support - even if you have none .
Keep in mind that people, having learnt from past mistakes, tend to only
say something when they have both come up with a prototype of an idea
and are willing/able to follow it through to a final implementation.
See the thread:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2001-06/msg00219.html
I think some people have worn themselves out trying to wressle a very
large bull called ``name space''. The last comment I saw, suggested
that rewriting the dwarf2 reader is probably overkill.
If I remember right, this, and other smaller problems are always
available for the taking.
Got your GPL assignment in order?
Andrew